CWP-21464 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (103) Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh Permanent Lok Adalat CORAM: Present: KULDEEP TIWARI CM-6767-CWP 1. fixed for hearing on 2. drive, which is being undertaken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43 of the main writ pet 21464-2021 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh Versus Permanent Lok Adalat and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Mr. Amit Jhanji, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate and Ms. Triyyambika Rao, Advocate for the non-applicant/petitioner. Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikas Jain, Advocate Mr. Kunal Mulwani, Advocate Mr. Devanshu Aggarwal, Advocate Mr. Vishesh Jain, Advocate and Ms. Aarzoo, Advocate for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43. Mr. Mayank Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.44 to 49. **** KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(ORAL) CWP-2025 Application is for preponement of the main writ petition, which is fixed for hearing on 19.05.2025. Fetching apprehension to be evicted on account of the drive, which is being undertaken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, has approached this Court, for adjudication of the main writ petition, on merits. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21464-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision : 05.05.2025 …Petitioner Versus ...Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI Amit Jhanji, Sr. Advocate with Advocate and Ms. Triyyambika Rao, Advocate applicant/petitioner. Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kunal Mulwani, Advocate Mr. Devanshu Aggarwal, Advocate Mr. Vishesh Jain, Advocate and for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43. Mr. Mayank Sharma, Advocate Application is for preponement of the main writ petition, which is Fetching apprehension to be evicted on account of the demolition drive, which is being undertaken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, the , has approached this Court, for adjudication Application is for preponement of the main writ petition, which is demolition drive, which is being undertaken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, the , has approached this Court, for adjudication MANPREET SINGH 2025.05.06 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-21464 3. submits that an award learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. However, the said award has been stayed, by the 25.10.2021, Chandigarh from their respective 4. 5. notice on behalf of the non 6. learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, this Court, finds merit in the instant application, and therefore, the same is 7. taken on the board today itself CM-6768-CWP 1. allowed, as prayed for, and the same are taken on record subject to just exceptions. 2. CM-6769 and 6770 1. submits that he does not wish to press both the instant applications, since this Court has already fixed the main case for arguments. 2. withdrawn, being not pressed at this stage. 21464-2021 (O&M) Learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, submits that an award dated 31.12.2019, has been passed in their favour by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. However, the said award has been by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, by drawing an order dated 25.10.2021, and under the garb of the said interim Administration, is now evicting from their respective Jhuggis/kacha houses. Notice of the application to the non Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the non-applicant/petitioner, and waives service. Considering the gravity and learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, this Court, finds merit in the instant application, and therefore, the same is Main case is preponed from 19.05.2025, taken on the board today itself. CWP-2025 Application for placing on record Annexures R allowed, as prayed for, and the same are taken on record subject to just Application stands disposed of 6769 and 6770-CWP-2025 Learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, submits that he does not wish to press both the instant applications, since this Court has already fixed the main case for arguments. Consequently, both the instant applications are withdrawn, being not pressed at this stage. 2 Learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, has been passed in their favour by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. However, the said award has been Coordinate Bench of this Court, by drawing an order dated said interim stay order, the U.T. ing all the applicants/respondents, /kacha houses. Notice of the application to the non-applicant/petitioner. Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate, who is present in the Court, accepts applicant/petitioner, and waives service. and the apprehension raised by the learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, this Court, finds merit in the instant application, and therefore, the same is allowed. from 19.05.2025, and is ordered to be Application for placing on record Annexures R-1 to R-24, is allowed, as prayed for, and the same are taken on record subject to just disposed of accordingly. Learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, submits that he does not wish to press both the instant applications, since this Court has already fixed the main case for arguments. Consequently, both the instant applications are dismissed as withdrawn, being not pressed at this stage. Learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, has been passed in their favour by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. However, the said award has been Coordinate Bench of this Court, by drawing an order dated U.T. all the applicants/respondents, Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate, who is present in the Court, accepts the learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, this Court, and is ordered to be 24, is allowed, as prayed for, and the same are taken on record subject to just Learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents No.2 to 43, submits that he does not wish to press both the instant applications, since this smissed as MANPREET SINGH 2025.05.06 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-21464 CWP-21464 1. the Constitution of India, a 31.12.2019 (Annexure P (Public Utility Services), Union Territory, Chandigarh, wherethrough, application preferred by the respondents No.2 to 43, has been a petitioner was directed to allot 125 sq. yards No.2 to 43, for their work place and residence at village Maloya Colony, Chandigarh. 2. respondents No.2 to 43, fairly submits before this Court, that the motion made before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, by the respondents, in fact, is a misconceived motion, as the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, does not vest with t that the award favour, and not in a position to take the respondents have also filed direction upon the U.T. Chandigarh uprooting and demolishing their allotment of a plinth sites, in terms of the award (Annexure P However, that motion was disposed of, with a liberty to the applicants/respondents, application for redressal of their grievance. motion petition, the only scope is the legality of the 21464-2021 (O&M) 21464-2024 Through the instant writ petition, cast under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a challenge is thrown to the impugned order dated 31.12.2019 (Annexure P-12), passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Union Territory, Chandigarh, wherethrough, application preferred by the respondents No.2 to 43, has been a petitioner was directed to allot 125 sq. yards No.2 to 43, for their work place and residence at village Maloya Colony, Chandigarh. At the very outset, learned senior counsel representing respondents No.2 to 43, fairly submits before this Court, that the motion made before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, by the respondents, in a misconceived motion, as the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, does not vest with the subject jurisdiction. However, he submits that the award dated 31.12.2019 (Annexure P and on account of the pendency of the instant not in a position to take any other alternative recourse. respondents have also filed a CWP No.12433 of 2025, for issuance of a direction upon the U.T. Chandigarh Administration uprooting and demolishing their Jhuggis/kacha houses allotment of a plinth sites, in terms of the award (Annexure P-12), as passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. However, that motion was disposed of, with a liberty to the /respondents, to approach this Court, by making necessary application for redressal of their grievance. petition, the only scope is the legality of the 3 Through the instant writ petition, cast under Articles 226/227 of challenge is thrown to the impugned order dated 12), passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Union Territory, Chandigarh, wherethrough, the application preferred by the respondents No.2 to 43, has been allowed, and the petitioner was directed to allot 125 sq. yards (each) plinth area to respondents No.2 to 43, for their work place and residence at village Maloya, and Bhaskar At the very outset, learned senior counsel representing the respondents No.2 to 43, fairly submits before this Court, that the motion made before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, by the respondents, in a misconceived motion, as the learned Permanent Lok Adalat he subject jurisdiction. However, he submits dated 31.12.2019 (Annexure P-12), has been passed in their on account of the pendency of the instant writ petition, they are other alternative recourse. He further submits that CWP No.12433 of 2025, for issuance of a Administration, to restrain them from Jhuggis/kacha houses, and also for the allotment of a plinth sites, in terms of the award dated 31.12.2019 passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. However, that motion was disposed of, with a liberty to the to approach this Court, by making necessary application for redressal of their grievance. Finally, he submits that in the petition, the only scope is the legality of the impugned award Through the instant writ petition, cast under Articles 226/227 of challenge is thrown to the impugned order dated 12), passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat the llowed, and the (each) plinth area to respondents and Bhaskar the respondents No.2 to 43, fairly submits before this Court, that the motion made before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, by the respondents, in a misconceived motion, as the learned Permanent Lok Adalat he subject jurisdiction. However, he submits has been passed in their , they are e further submits that CWP No.12433 of 2025, for issuance of a , to restrain them from , and also for the dated 31.12.2019 passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. However, that motion was disposed of, with a liberty to the to approach this Court, by making necessary submits that in the award. MANPREET SINGH 2025.05.06 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-21464 Furthermore, concerned, is itself not maintainable, and therefore, he may be granted the liberty to withdraw the said petition. 3. the U.T. Chandigarh arrangements, the respondents No.2 to 43 herein, would be shifted bedroom flat entitlement, either to the one bedroom flat, or the pl before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned adjudicated by the authorities concerned. 4. the applicants/respondents before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, become remediless. by the learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents, and consequently, they are allowed to withdraw learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. 5. senior counsel for the U.T. Chandigarh Administration upon the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, respondents No.2 to 43, from their be shifted to a one bedroom flat arrangement right/title, upon the respondents bedroom flat. 21464-2021 (O&M) Furthermore, the motion filed before the learned concerned, is itself not maintainable, and therefore, he may be granted the liberty to withdraw the said petition. At this stage, Mr. Amit Jhanji, the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, submits that only as a stop gap arrangements, the respondents No.2 to 43 herein, would be shifted flat, before uprooting them, subject to the adjudication of their entitlement, either to the one bedroom flat, or the pl before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned adjudicated by the authorities concerned. In view of the above development, this Court finds that in case, the applicants/respondents are not allowed to before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, become remediless. Therefore, this Court finds merit in the submission made by the learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents, and consequently, they are allowed to withdraw learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned. Furthermore, on account of the statement made by the learned senior counsel for the U.T. Chandigarh Administration upon the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, respondents No.2 to 43, from their respective be shifted to a one bedroom flat. It goes without saying that arrangement is purely a stop gap arrangement, and will not confer any right/title, upon the respondents No.2 to 43, upon the said arrangement of one bedroom flat. 4 the motion filed before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, is itself not maintainable, and therefore, he may be granted the Mr. Amit Jhanji, learned senior standing counsel for , submits that only as a stop gap arrangements, the respondents No.2 to 43 herein, would be shifted to a one , before uprooting them, subject to the adjudication of their entitlement, either to the one bedroom flat, or the plinth area, as claim before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, which has to be In view of the above development, this Court finds that in case, are not allowed to withdraw the motion, filed before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, they would, in fact, Therefore, this Court finds merit in the submission made by the learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents, and consequently, they are allowed to withdraw the motion, as filed before the Furthermore, on account of the statement made by the learned senior counsel for the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, a mandamus is passed upon the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, that before uprooting the respective Jhuggis/kacha houses, they shall . It goes without saying that the said is purely a stop gap arrangement, and will not confer any No.2 to 43, upon the said arrangement of one Permanent Lok Adalat concerned, is itself not maintainable, and therefore, he may be granted the learned senior standing counsel for , submits that only as a stop gap one , before uprooting them, subject to the adjudication of their , as claimed to be In view of the above development, this Court finds that in case, withdraw the motion, filed , in fact, Therefore, this Court finds merit in the submission made by the learned senior counsel for the applicants/respondents, and the motion, as filed before the Furthermore, on account of the statement made by the learned , a mandamus is passed that before uprooting the they shall the said is purely a stop gap arrangement, and will not confer any No.2 to 43, upon the said arrangement of one MANPREET SINGH 2025.05.06 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-21464 6. claim and entitlement of responde bedroom flat, or the plinth sites, in view of the policy the U.T. Chandigarh Administration. 7. No.2 to 43, shal receipt of certified copy of this order. not found to be entitled for a one bedroom flat, the latter said one bedroom flat Administration, 8. grievance of the decision, to be taken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, they are at liberty to accordance with law. 9. May 05, 2025 Manpreet 21464-2021 (O&M) The U.T. Chandigarh Administration entitlement of respondents No.2 to 43, either with regard to the one bedroom flat, or the plinth sites, in view of the policy the U.T. Chandigarh Administration. The exercise to decide the entitlement of the respondents No.2 to 43, shall be carried out within a period of six months receipt of certified copy of this order. In case, the respondents No.2 to 43, are found to be entitled for a one bedroom flat, the latter id one bedroom flat arrangement, as provided by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, within a period of 30 days thereafter. Furthermore, in case, the respondents No.2 to 43, fetches any grievance of the decision, to be taken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, e at liberty to take all legal remedies, accordance with law. Consequently, the instant writ petition is , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 5 The U.T. Chandigarh Administration, is directed to consider the nts No.2 to 43, either with regard to the one bedroom flat, or the plinth sites, in view of the policy/decision, as adopted by The exercise to decide the entitlement of the respondents l be carried out within a period of six months, from the date of In case, the respondents No.2 to 43, are found to be entitled for a one bedroom flat, the latter(s), shall vacate the as provided by the U.T. Chandigarh within a period of 30 days thereafter. , in case, the respondents No.2 to 43, fetches any grievance of the decision, to be taken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, take all legal remedies, as may be available to them, in Consequently, the instant writ petition is disposed of. (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No is directed to consider the nts No.2 to 43, either with regard to the one /decision, as adopted by The exercise to decide the entitlement of the respondents from the date of In case, the respondents No.2 to 43, are shall vacate the as provided by the U.T. Chandigarh , in case, the respondents No.2 to 43, fetches any grievance of the decision, to be taken by the U.T. Chandigarh Administration, available to them, in MANPREET SINGH 2025.05.06 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment