PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SURESHWAR THAKUR, VIKAS SURI, JJ.
Ishar Singh Walia (Since Deceased) Through Lrs. - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Punjab And Others - Respondent
CWP-15134-2003 (O & M)
Decided On : 11-02-2025
JUDGMENT :
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner herein, prays for the hereinafter extracted relief.
"Writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to allot to the petitioner a residential plot measuring 250 sq. yards @ Rs. 125/- per sq. yard (the rate prevalent in the year 1982 -when the application 'was made) in 475 acres scheme known as Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Scheme or any other appropriate scheme of the respondent Trust "
Factual Background
2. The petitioner in response to an advertisement dated 28.12.1981 (Annexure P-1), applied for the allotment of plot measuring 250 sq. yards. The said scheme was floated by the Ludhiana Improvement Trust for allotment of plots in Raj Guru Nagar. However, the petitioner was not successful in the draw of lots, as became held in October, 1982 vis-a-vis the said scheme.
3. Thereafter, the respondent Trust published another advertisement (Annexure P-3), wherebys, applications became invited for allotment of plots under various categories, through the conducting of draw of lots, thus, in Shaheed-e-Azam Bhagat Singh Nagar. In condition No. 3 of the said advertisement, condition whereof, is extracted hereinafter, it was mentioned that 25 % of the plots, thus were reserved for such persons, who had applied for allotment of plots in other Trust Schemes, but were not successful in the allotment of plots.
" 25 % plots 'will be reserved for those persons who have already applied for the allotment of plots in other Trust Schemes but were not successful in getting plots together with applicants left out of Sr. No. 2 above. "
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioner made a written request on 21.10.1982 to the respondent-Trust, to the extent, that the amount deposited by him for allotment of plot, in the earlier scheme, whereins, he was not successful in getting allotment of the plot, be adjusted for the allotment of plot measuring 200 square yards in the advertised scheme.
5. However, before the draw of lots could be held, the State of Punjab framed the Punjab Town Improvement (Utilization of Land and Allotment of Plots) Rules, 1983 (hereinafter called as the 1983 Rules). The relevant Rule 4 of the 1983 Rules is extracted hereinafter.
4. Reservation of residential plots and multi-storeyed houses.
(1) Subject to the provisions of rule 10, residential plots and multi-storeyed houses shall be reserved for allotment to the following categories of persons to the extent specified against each:-

Provided that ten per cent of the residential plots and multi- storeyed houses shall be reserved for persons whose applications for allotment of residential plots and multi-storeyed houses are pending for a period of more than five years ending with the date of commencement of these rules :
Provided further that the unutilized plots reserved for different categories of persons under sub-rule (1) for want of eligible persons shall be open for allotment to the persons other than the reserve categories of persons:
Provided further that ten per cent of the residential plots and multi-storeyed houses shall be allotted by the Trust with the approval of the Government to such category or class of persons and in the manner as the Government may from time to time keeping in view the socio-economic conditions of such persons specify.
xxxxx xxxxx
6. It is apt to mention here that CWP-7401-1996 was filed by Dr. Amar Singh and others, wherebys, the petitioners challenged the vires of Rule 4 of the 1983 Rules. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 25.07.2003, wherebys, Rule 4(i), (iv), (vii) and proviso 3 to the aforesaid Rules, whereins, allotments were being made under the discretionary quota, were held to be both illegal, and unconstitutional, thus by the Full Bench of this Court. The relevant paragraphs of the said verdict are extracted hereinafter.
15. In the present case, written statements have been filed on behalf of the Improvement Trusts pursuant to the orders pass

Court upheld the petitioner's rights based on principles of natural justice and promissory estoppel, quashing arbitrary administrative decisions regarding plot allotment.
Discretionary quotas must satisfy criteria of reasonableness as required by Article 14 of the Constitution.
Petitioners cannot challenge allotment amounts after acquiescing to the allotment orders and making partial payments, as they were unauthorized occupants without valid claims.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Rule 17 of the DDA (Disposal of Developed Nazul Land) Rules, 1981, which governs the allotment of Nazul land ....
Mandatory prior approval from the Assistant Collector is essential for land allotments under Section 122-C of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, making unauthorized claims invalid.
Authority must provide preferential land allotment to disabled persons per applicable legislation; arbitrary cancellations and excessive interests are unjust.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.