IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on: 28.01.2025 Pronounced on: 5.02.2025 MOHAN LAL .....Petitioner Versus UT OF CHANDIGARH AND ORS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSITCE VIKAS SURI Argued by: Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Anil Sharma, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

Mr. V.D. Anand, Advocate with Ms. Priyanka Dalal, Advocate for respondent No.4.

****

SURESHWAR THAKUR , J .

1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner herein, prays for the quashing of impugned order dated 19.09.2017, Annexure (P-15), wherebys the appellate authority constituted under Clause 17 of the Chandigarh Small Flats Scheme, 2006, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Scheme’) has rejected the appeal of the present petitioner. The present petitioner is also seeking the passing of a mandamus upon the official respondents to allot to him, thus the small flat under “the Scheme”.

Factual Background

2. The Chandigarh Administration has introduced the Chandigarh Small Flats Scheme 2006, wherein, it was decided that persons residing in Jhuggis would be given a one room apartment by the Administration. The present petitioner had applied for the same.

3. The petitioner’s application was not considered by the respondent concerned. Resultantly, the present petitioner became aggrieved and filed an application for settlement of the dispute, under, the Legal Services Authorities Act, before the Permanent Lok Adalat, Chandigarh. The Permanent Lok Adalat rejected the said application, by holding that the petitioner cannot be considered as “recognized resident” as required under the Scheme, therefore he is not eligible for allotment.

4. Aggrieved by the order of the Permanent Lok Adalat, the petitioner had filed writ petition bearing No.CWP-11542-2015, challenging the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat. The learned Single bench of this Court proceeded to set aside the order of Permanent Lok Adalat and also remanded the lis to the Lok Adalat for a fresh decision.

5. Thereafter, the Permanent Lok Adalat only observed that the applicant i.e present petitioner has to file an appeal before Chief Executive officer of CHB under clause 17 of the Scheme. In view of the said direction, the present petitioner filed an appeal before the Chief Executive officer. The appellate authority rejected the claim of the petitioner, by observing that in absence of any admissible proof of residence rather for the requisite years, thus the appellant (present petitioner) is not eligible under scheme.

6. Hence, the instant writ petition becomes filed against the said order.

7. The entire nerve centre of this lis becomes centred upon the respective applicability or inapplicability vis-a-vis the petitioner’s case qua the mandate as enclosed in sub clause (g) of Clause 3 of the Scheme, clause whereof becomes extracted hereinafter.

“Recognized Resident” means a resident of a Notified colony whose name is included both in the voter list of 2006 and whose name is also included in the Bio Metric Survey conducted by the Chandigarh Administration in the month of March 2006and is continuously residing in the colony. Provided that in case of the demise of the Recognized Resident (RR) one member of his family, as defined above, who fulfills the conditions of the RR will be eligible for being a licensee”

8. Clause 6 of The Chandigarh Small Flats Scheme 2006, is also relevant, as such, the said clause also becomes extracted hereinafter.

“6. (a) With respect to every block of a Notified Colony selected for clearance, allotment of a flat shall be made as under: (i) All persons whose names appear in the biometric survey and voter list as on 01.01.2006 shall be eligible for allotment of a flat on license basis. The name of the person should also appear in the latest voter list of the year in which allotment is to be made.

(ii) A person who owns more than one habitation in any of the Notified Colonies in his own name or in the