29.11.2025 -2019 (O & M) Ashwani K ani Kumar and others … v. Smt. Navra Haryana Manageme Secretariat Navraj Sandhu, IAS, Additional Chie l Chief Secretary to
Case Details
COCP-3049-2019 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN T AT CHANDIGAR UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 101+202 COCP No.3049- Date of decision : sion :-29.11.2025 -2019 (O & M) Ashwani K ani Kumar and others …..Petitioners Versus Smt. Navra Haryana Manageme Secretariat Navraj Sandhu, IAS, Additional Chie l Chief Secretary to Government, ana and Financial Commissioner sioner, Revenue & Disaster epartment, New Haryana Civil gement and Consolidation Departm nother tariat, Sec.17, Chandigarh and anothe …..Respondents CORAM: AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH NIDHI GUPTA Present:-
Legal Reasoning
Mr. B.R. Rana, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. A.G., for respondents No.1, 2 and 5. . A.G., Haryana e with Ms. Eliza Gupta, Advocate with ocate Mr. Sahil Shehrawat, Advocate ents No.3 and 4. for the interveners/respondents N NIDHI GU I GUPTA J. (Oral) Present contempt petition has be has been filed alleging violation of order dated dated 25.9.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed passed by a predecessor Bench of this Court i ourt in CWP-25443-2013 titled as “As s “Ashwani Kumar and others vs. State of Ha of Haryana and others”, whereby the y the same was allowed with the following ob ing observations :- “….The petitioners are are also claiming alternative allotment, which is the the prayer made in the present case also and the said i id issue shall also be gone into. Since it is an old case case, it is expected that the authorities shall make ea e earnest efforts to dispose of the VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3049-2019 (O & M) 2 issue within a period of of 6 months from the receipt of the certified copy of this o his order.” In compliance of the last order order dated 10.11.2025, respondent No.5 is pres is present in person in Court. Learned counsel for the petiti petitioners submits that in non- compliance liance of the abovesaid direction, the plo the plots have not yet been allotted to the petitio petitioners. Learned counsel for the respo respondents No.1, 2 and 5/State refers to the to the Compliance Report dated 20.11.2 0.11.2025 filed by way of affidavit of Shri La hri Lachhi Ram, Naib Tehsildar (M) r (M), Additional Charge, Naib Tehsildar S ldar Sales, Narnaul, District Mahend ahendergarh-respondent No.5; in particular to ular to Annexure R-3, which is an orde n order dated 21.1.2020 passed by the Tehsilda ehsildar (Sale) Narnaul to submit that th that the allotment of plots No.1081 and 1082 s 082 situated in Narnaul, District Mah t Mahendergarh, was made to the father of th of the petitioners in the year 1961. 961. It is submitted that the said allotment, o ent, on the face of it, was an inadverten vertent error as the said plots have already bee y been sold by its owner i.e. the Cen e Central Government to one Shri Sunder Sing er Singh s/o Shri Gian Chand on 07.11. 07.11.1958. It is submitted that in respect of p ct of plot No.1301 as is clarified in Anne n Annexure R-4, the said plot is not traceable as ble as in the subsequent changes that to that took place on the spot, in place of the said said plot, a plot No.1299 exists, the b the boundaries of which, matched with the orig he original plot stated to be 1301. At this stage, learned counsel fo nsel for the interveners/respondents No.3 and 4, and 4, who are the allottees of plot No.1 t No.1299 submits that the said plot No.1299 wa 99 was allotted to the predecessors-in in-interest of respondents No.3 and 4 on d on dated 11.9.1957. It is also disp disputed by learned counsel for respondents ndents No.3 and 4 that the boundaries o ries of plots No.1301 and 1299 are matching. VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3049-2019 (O & M) 3 It is accordingly submitted by d by both learned counsel for the respondents ndents that even prior to the allotmen otment to the predecessors of the petitioners i oners in the year 1961, the plots in ques n question already stood allotted to other person persons. It is also to be noted that again against the allotment of 1961, the petitioners h oners had approached the revenue autho authorities on dated 04.4.2001 i.e. after a perio a period of 40 years, whereupon their app eir application dated 04.4.2001 was dismissed b ssed by the Deputy Tehsildar (Sales) on es) on dated 21.6.2001. On several Court queri queries to the petitioners as to why the hy there was a delay of 40 years in approaching aching the concerned authorities, learne learned counsel for the petitioners submits tha its that during these 40 years, he was e was approaching the concerned authorities. rities. However, nothing has been place placed on record to show that the petitioners oners were proceeding with their case case in the intervening 40 years. After the di the dismissal of their application by the by the Deputy Tehsildar (Sale) vide order dated dated 21.6.2001, the petitioners had filed d filed Case Nos.21, 22, 23 of 2002 under Sectio Section 33 before the Financial Commi ommissioner, which was dismissed on 03.6.200 3.6.2002. The revision filed by the the petitioners before the Chief Settlement C ment Commissioner was also dismissed issed on 30.9.2002. Thereafter the petitioners h oners had approached this Court after 11 ter 11 years; by way of instant Civil Writ Petitio Petition No.25443 of 2013, thereby layin laying challenge to the order dated 30.9.2002 p 002 passed by the Chief Settlement Com nt Commissioner. Notwithstanding the delay of th y of the petitioners in pursuing the case, the Wr e Writ Court direction is also very o very clear; inasmuch it is only directed tha ed that the case of the petitioners be con be considered afresh and alternative allotment to ent to the petitioners be also considered. idered. Learned counsel for he State, on the St instructions from respondent ndent No.5 who is present in person, s rson, submits that alternative plots No.1081 an 81 and 1082, each measuring 169 squ 9 square yards situated in Khasra VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-3049-2019 (O & M) 4 No.2352, a 52, already stand allotted to the p the petitioners vide order dated 21.01.2020 .2020 (Annexure R-3). However, the the petitioners are themselves refusing to t ng to take possession of the said plots. It lots. It is further submitted that with regard to th d to the issue of plot No.1301, the respo respondents are ready and willing to provide a vide an alternative plot of the same mea e measurement in the same Khasra number and er and that the matter is actively under co nder consideration. Having noted the above said fac facts, which are not disputed by learned cou d counsel for the petitioners, the pres e present contempt petition stands ssed. dismissed. Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, sh
Decision
shall stand(s) disposed of. November mber 29, 2025 Asija Vijay Asija ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether spe Whether Rep er speaking/reasoned Yes / No er Reportable Yes / No VIJAY ASIJA 2025.12.03 18.01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document