IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 15.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 29.01.2025 SANJEEV VERMA -PETITIONER V/S UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. C.L.Verma, Advocate for the petitioner.

None for respondent no.1 Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate and Mr. Parminder Singh Kaul, Advocate, for respondents no.2 and 3.

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. It is a classic case where the object of benevolent policy adopted by the State was defeated on account of an arbitrary, unreasonableness and bureaucratic adventurism.

2. In the instant case, initially, the petitioner was wrongly denied his rightful claiming on a flimsy ground, but latter on his claim was established through a legal procedure adopted by him, yet, there is another attempt to deprive the fruit ripped through the legal procedure, while raising the unreasonable demand by the respondents.

3. Through the instant petition, challenge is thrown to the order dated 27.05.2015 (Annexure P-7), passed in the second execution application moved by the petitioner for execution of order dated

01.06.2013, by the Additional District Judge, Chandigarh, as well as order dated 08.06.2016 (Annexure P-8), passed by respondent no.4-the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), UT, Chandigarh, (for short 'the PLA') whereby, the application of the petitioner seeking clarification of its earlier order dated 08.10.2007, was declined.

4. Since this issue involves, an allotment of a plot to a Auto Electrician and has a long checkered legal history, therefore, this Court in order to give quietus, to the dispute once and for all, deems it apt to dive deep into the facts of the instant case, as essential for the adjudication of the instant lis, which are as under:-

i. The petitioner was running his business of Auto Electrician since 1987, in Chandigarh, at a place not meant for such use. He alongwith several other persons of this category, were to be evicted from the sites occupied by them. Therefore, in order to mitigate the hardships likely to be caused to such persons, the Chandigarh Administration formulated a scheme “The Allotment of Sites on Lease-Hold basis to Auto Spare Part Dealers and Auto Repair Mechanics in Chandigarh Scheme, 1999”, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Scheme of

1999').

ii. The petitioner's name was also enclosed in the list, as prepared by the Chadigarh Administration, and his name was figured at Sr. No.1038 in the survey conducted in the year 1997. Having been eligible, he applied for allotment of booth way back on dated 27.06.2006, and deposited an amount of Rs.14,500/-, under the old scheme. On receipt of a letter from the respondent no.3-Estate Officer, UT, Chandigarh, the petitioner deposited Rs.35,654/- in February, 2001. Subsequently, some objections were raised by the respondent concerned, which were duly met by the petitioner, however, his application was finally rejected in July, 2006, by respondent no.3-Estate Officer, informing him that his application has been rejected by the Screening Committee. The rejection caused grievance to the petitioner and propelled him to file an application No.80/2007, before respondent no.4- the PLA, which was duly contested by the UT, Chandgiarh, and finally, an order dated 08.10.2007, was passed in favour of the petitioner and a specific direction was issued upon the respondent concerned, to allot a shop/booth, which is lying vacant and unallotted, to the petitioner.

iii. The respondents, checked the legality of the order (supra), by filing a CWP No.15352 of 2019 before this Court, however, they remained unsuccessful as the said writ petition was dismissed vide judgment passed by this Court on dated

08.10.2009 (Annexure P-3).

iv. Thereafter, respondent no.3-Estate Officer, issued a memo No.6645, dated 15.03.2012, conveying the decision of respondent no.2-Chandigarh Administration, to allot a booth to the petitioner in the Motor Market, Sector 38 and 48, Chandigarh