Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ishwar Singh Saini vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 20 November, 2024
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
CWP-28754-2024 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(113)
CWP-28754-2024
Date of decision:- 20.11.2024
Ishwar Singh Saini ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Mr. C.M.Munjal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sharad Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana for respondents No.1 to 4.
Mr. R.D.Gupta, Advocate and
Mr. K.K.Vinayak, Advocate for respondent 5-Society.
****
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
1. By way of instant petition, petitioner has approached this Court
under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter-alia for issuance of
a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to execute
conveyance deed in favour of the petitioner as he is a permanent member of
the Society-respondent No.5 and has paid the entire amount.
2. Mr. Munjal, counsel for the petitioner submits that after the
deposit of the entire amount, petitioner has been handed over possession
vide letter dated 26.09.2003, Annexure P-3 and an allotment-cum-
possession letter was issued on 23.07.2004, Annexure P-4. He asserts that
despite multiple requests, conveyance deed for the plot is not being
executed. He submits that the petitioner has submitted a representation
dated 18.12.2015, Annexure P-7, to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative
Societies, Gurugram for the execution of the conveyance deed and despite
reminders, no action has been taken.
authenticity of this order/judgment
3. Advance copy of the petition has been served upon the
respondents.
4. Mr. Gupta, who appears on behalf of the Society-respondent
No.5, has referred to order dated 14.11.2018 passed in CWP-24821-2018
titled as A.K.Kaul Versus The State of Haryana & others, which has been
clarified vide order dated 01.05.2019 passed in CWP-11322-2019 titled as
Vinod Gupta Versus Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Haryana and
others. He could not dispute that in similar situation, directions have been
issued by this Court directing the official respondents to decide the
representation.
5. Given the nature of order proposed to be passed, this Court does
not deem it necessary to issue notice to the respondents and to call upon
them to file a response.
6. Having heard counsel for the parties, writ petition is disposed of
with a direction to the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies,
Gurugram-respondent No.5 to decide the representation, Annexure P-7,
within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order keeping in view of the observations made by this Court in A.K.Kaul's
case (supra) and Vinod Gupta's case (supra).
20.11.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
Kamal JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
authenticity of this order/judgment
