ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral) For, learned counsel for the parties submit that the matter in issue in all these three cases is identical, these are being disposed of by a common order and judgment. However, the facts are being derived from CWP No.4261-2019. The petitioner has prayed for the following substantive relief:-

“Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ 1 of 3 order or direction especially in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the order dated 27.02.2018 (Annexure P-2) whereby claim of the petitioner was rejected being wrong, illegal, arbitrary and against the judgment passed by the full bench of this Court in Rajiv Manchanda and Ors. Vs. Haryana Urban Development Authorities Panchkula & Ors in CWP No. 22252/2016 decided on dated 22.11.2017 and in case LPA No.2096 of 2011 titled “Haryana Urban Development Authority & others Vs. Sandeep & others”

decided on 25.04.2012. AND Further a writ in nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner and to allot a plot to the petitioner under the Oustees quota in accordance with his entitlement as per policy dated 18.3