CWP No.18092 of 2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 124 CWP No.18092 of 2026 Date of decision: July 14th, 2026 Dharambir Malik .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present: Mr. Madhur Panwar, Advocates for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. In the present writ petition, following prayers have been made: “i. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents to forthwith conduct the draw of lots and allot a residential plot to the Petitioner under the R&R Policy on the basis of full parity with the case of Smt. Veena Malik — being an oustee of the same acquisition whose draw was conducted by the Respondents on 08.05.2026 and in respect of whom Letter of Intent dated 11.05.2026 (Annexure P-14) has been issued allotting Plot No. 67, Sector 33-A, IMT Rohtak — within a definite time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. ii. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents to forthwith consider and decide the Petitioner's Representation dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-13) by a reasoned and speaking order on the basis of parity and identical factual matrix with the case of Smt. Veena Malik, and to extend the PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.07.16 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.18092 of 2026 2 same benefit of conduct of draw of lots and consequential allotment of a residential plot to the Petitioner within a time-bound period to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. iii. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned Letter No.HSIIDC:R&R:2025:/70 dated 26.12.2025 (Annexure P-8) issued by Respondent No. 3 on behalf of Respondent No. 2, whereby a fresh Committee has been unconstitutionally and illegally constituted to determine and approve eligibility under the Land Pooling Scheme-2012 and R&R Policy – in respect of the Petitioner and others whose eligibility has already been finally determined by the FLSC vide its Minutes dated 09.10.2025 (ANX. P-6). iv. Exempt the petitioners from filing certified/fair typed copies of the Annexures and be permitted to file the true translated/photocopies of the same. v. Serving of advance notice upon the respondents may kindly be dispensed with; vi. Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the land of the petitioner was acquired for the development of IMT, HSIIDS, Rohtak and the award was announced in the year 2013 and subsequently the petitioner had applied for allotment of residential plot under the applicable rehabilitation and resettlement policy and the petitioner was found eligible by the Field Level Screening Committee as well as by the competent authority and an eligibility certificate was also issued to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has completed all the formalities and till date PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.07.16 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.18092 of 2026 3 the petitioner, who is a 76 year old citizen has not been allotted a plot. It is submitted that one Veena Malik, who is similarly placed as the petitioner, has already been allotted the plot. It is further submitted that for the redressal of the grievance, a representation dated 05.05.2026 has been given but the respondents have not responded to the said representation. It is further submitted that even subsequent to the said representation, certain additional facts are there which further support the case of the petitioner and accordingly, it is stated that the petitioner be permitted to give a fresh representation and a prayer has been made before this Court that the said representation be considered and decided by the competent authority of the respondents in a time bound manner. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that in case any such representation is given by the petitioner, then the competent authority would consider the same in accordance with law and pass a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of the said representation, after hearing the petitioner or his representative. 4. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, the present petition is disposed of with the following observations/directions: (i) It would be open to the petitioner to give a fresh detailed representation to the competent authority of respondent No.1/State giving the entire detail of his claim and also the details of the persons, who as per the petitioner, are similarly placed as the petitioner, along with the relevant documents. (ii) In case any such representation is given by the petitioner, the PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.07.16 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.18092 of 2026 4 competent authority of the respondents/State is directed to consider the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the said representation, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his legal representatives. The competent authority would be required to pass a speaking order. (iii) In case the representation of the petitioner is found to be meritorious, then the necessary relief be also granted to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not opined on the merits of the case and the competent authority would consider and decide the representation independently. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE July 14th, 2026 (SUBHAS MEHLA) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.07.16 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh