- विज्ञापन -
Ludhiana: Punjab and Haryana High Court imposed a conditional penalty of Rs 5 lakh on Chairman of Ludhiana Improvement Trust Tarsem Singh Bhinder and the amount is to be paid by Bhinder from his own pocket if the LIT fails to allot a plot to a woman in a Local Displaced Person. Category (LDP) by the next date of hearing.
After the court initiated the proceedings of contempt of court order on August 20 and directed the respondents to remain present in Court for further proceedings and to explain their conduct, Tejveer Singh, Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Local Government, Punjab along with Tarsem Singh Bhinder, Chairman, Ludhiana Improvement Trust had appeared before the court on August 23.
A recent order by the bench of Justice Harkesh Manuja, on August 23, mentioned that in pursuance to the order dated August 20, 2024, Tejveer Singh, Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Local Government, Punjab along with Tarsem Singh Bhinder, Chairman, Ludhiana Improvement Trust are present in court and have assured the implementation of the order dated 10.02.2015 in all letter and spirit shall be carried out before the next date of hearing, which is August 29, 2024.
“It is made clear that in case, undertaking extended before this Court is not complied with, respondent No.2 (Tarsem Singh Bhinder) shall be liable to pay cost of Rs.5,00,000/- to the petitioner on account of inordinate and unexplained delay in compliance of the order. The cost shall be borne from his own pocket and in case of default, the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue,” read court orders.
The matter pertains to allotment of a plot as a Local Displaced Person and the petitioner Pritam Kaur had filed a writ petition in the High Court in 2001 challenging the court order dated December 22, 1999. In this case titled Pritam Kaur v/s State of Punjab and others of 2001 the final orders were passed on February 10, 2015 dismissing the writ petition stating that the petitioner has applied for allotment of a plot without any advertisement in the year 1984 when as per Punjab Town Improvement (Utilisation of Land and Allotment of Plots) Rules, 1983 the allotments can be made only after applications are invited after publication of advertisement in daily newspapers. “Therefore, the application of the petitioner could not have been entertained for allotment of a plot without any advertisement as per the provisions of the statutory Rules,” stated the court in February 2015.
Moreover, considering the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that other co-sharers have been allotted plots in the similar manner without inviting applications does not merit any acceptance.
The court had then mentioned that even if the respondent-Improvemet Trust has not followed the mandate of law while allotting the plots to the other co-sharers, the petitioner cannot claim allotment of plot on the same parity. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim allotment of a plot merely because co-sharers of the petitioner have been allotted plots in violation of the statutory Rules.
However, the court added that the claim of the petitioner for allotment of a plot cannot be ignored for all times to come. As and when the Improvement Trust decides to allot plots meant for the land owners whose land stands acquired, the petitioner shall be at liberty to apply for the same. The petitioner shall be considered for allotment of plots in accordance with law.
Later, in 2020 the petitioner filed the petition under sections of the contempt of court act mentioning about the violation of orders of the court ‘consideration of the claim made by the petitioner’ passed on February 10, 2015.
This month, on August 20, 2024, the court had initiated the proceedings of contempt of court.
The court had observed that despite the order for consideration of the claim made by the petitioner, the claim of the petitioner was never considered but the other similarly situated local displaced persons were made allotment. However, it was further added that now after a period of almost 9 years, the matter pertaining to the rights of the petitioner is under consideration with the Committee constituted by the Directorate Local Government Department, Punjab, before which the case of the petitioner was referred in January, 2024.
On August 20, the court mentioned, “A cumulative analysis of the facts clearly reflects the willful disobedience and neglect on the part of the respondents towards the order dated 10.02.2015 passed by this Court while ignoring the consideration upon the claim made by the petitioner; having made allotment in favour of other similarly placed allottees. In such circumstances, a prima facie case for initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act is made out against the respondents. Accordingly, respondents are directed to remain present in Court for further proceedings and to explain their conduct.”
