Petitioners' failure to apply as per advertised process negates entitlement to oustee plot.

JUDGMENT :

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

Through the instant writ petition, the petitioners herein, pray for the quashing of the impugned order/letter dated 28.09.2022 (Annexure P-28), as made/issued by the Administrator (HQ), HSVP, Panchkula wherebys, the allotment of oustee plot No. 2739BP, Sector 57, Gurugram to the petitioner was held illegal and further directions were issued to the Administrator, Gurugram to pass speaking order accordingly.

2. Further prayer is made for quashing of the impugned speaking order dated 12.09.2023 (Annexure P-31), as made by the Administrator HSVP, Gurugram, wherebys, the petitioners were held not entitled for an oustee plot.

Factual Background and inferences of this Court.

3. Initially the land of the petitioners was acquired for development of Sector 57, Gurugram vide award No. 56 dated 21.07.2003. Thereafter, HUDA issued advertisement for allotment of plots in Sector - 57 in various categories including Oustees Quota. In pursuance to the said advertisement issued by HUDA, the petitioners vide application dated 12.03.2004, duly applied for residential plot under the oustees quota by depositing the requisite fee along with earnest money. The petitioners' application was rejected, thus on the ground that the acquired land of the petitioners was less than 75 % of the land therebys, they were ineligible to apply under the oustees quota.

4. The petitioners filed CWP-8405-2010 against the said rejection order, which was disposed of vide order dated 10.05.2010 with a direction to the respondents to decide the claim of the petitioners within three months. In compliance to the said order, respondent No. 4-Administrator HUDA rejected the claim of the petitioners by holding that the acquired land of the petitioner is 71.38 % which was less than the required 75 %.

5. Thereafter, the petitioners filed CROCP No. 3 of 2010. However, during the pendency of the said criminal contempt, the Oustees Court passed an order dated 13.05.2011 (Annexure P-4), wherebys the petitioners were declared to be eligible for allotment of 1 kanal plot under the Oustees quota but subject to order dated 10.12.2007 passed in Rattan Lal's case whereins it has been held that any allotment of plot to any oustee without due advertisement in any case would be viewed seriously as the existing process without advertisement is likely to be misused.

6. Since the supra condition as made in Annexure P-4, wherebys the petitioners were to file a fresh application, for allotment against the oustee quota, thus brought grievance to the present petitioners, thereupons, the petitioners filed CWP -15754-2012. In the said writ petition, a specific plea became raised that the orders passed in Rattan Lal's case (supra) would not be applicable to the present petitioners case. The said writ petition was disposed of in terms of the verdict dated 25.04.2012 passed in LPA-2096 of 2011 titled as " Haryana Urban Development Authority and Others Vs. Sandeep and Others ".

7. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners approached the Hon'ble Apex Court through filing an SLP there against. The said SLP was disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file review petition before the High Court within 30 days. The said review petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to avail alternative remedy as available to them in accordance with law.

8. Thereafter, the petitioners filed CWP-22403-2014 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order 28.01.2016 with a direction to the respondents to consider