The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a Petition challenging the allocation of membership of a Super Deluxe category flat by HUDA, Urban Estate and Town and Country Planning Employees Welfare Organization (HEWO) and observed that the petitioner became estopped to contend that there was any illegality in the passing of the minutes after he unsuccessfully participated in the draw of lots.

The Petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing of the decision whereby HEWO (second respondent) allocated the membership of the Super Deluxe category flat to the third respondent, who is the Managing Director of the Organisation, on a preferential basis. Furthermore, the petitioner also sought the quashing of the impugned letter whereby the membership of the Super Deluxe category flat became allocated to the fourth respondent, who is an Officer working in the office of the Chief Controller of Finance, HSVP, Panchkula.

The Divison Bench comprising Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri said, “Moreover also, when the present petitioner also unsuccessfully participated in the draw of lots, therebys he becomes estopped to contend that there was any illegality in the passing of the minutes (supra) in the meeting held on 14.9.2021, wherebys vis-a-vis the surrendered/withdrawal membership of Mr. Makrand Pandurang, IAS, thus an apt decision was taken to allot the same to the other eligible person.”

Advocate Manjeet Singh represented the Petitioner, while Addl. A.G., Haryana Ankur Mittal represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

Vide a letter issued by the second respondent- HUDA, Urban Estate and Town and Country Planning, Scheme-II, Faridabad, Employees Welfare Organization (HEWO), new members were to be enrolled for the second scheme at Sector 21-C, Faridabad, from amongst the employees of HUDA, Urban Estate Department and Town and Country Planning Department. It was averred that when Yashendra Singh (petitioner) applied for the membership of a Deluxe category flat, he was serving as Estate Officer, HUDA, Bhiwani. When he became posted as Administrator, HUDA, Faridabad, it was decided in a meeting that his membership be upgraded on the availability of a super deluxe category flat during re-planning.

A public notice was published informing the employees about the floating of cancelled membership of flats at Sectors 19, 20 and 21, Faridabad. The petitioner, an officer from the Prosecution Department, Haryana, was serving with HSVP on the date of the advertisement. He and one Puran Chand- fourth respondent working in the office of the Chief Controller of Finance, HSVP, Panchkula applied for membership in the category of super deluxe flat.

The fourth Respondent was allocated membership of the Super Deluxe category flat, and the petitioner received a letter regarding the refund of the earnest money along with a cheque. Subsequently, the petitioner made a representation to HEWO. However, the governing body of HEWO decided to regularise the allocation of membership of Super Deluxe category flats to the fourth respondent and again returned the cheque of earnest money to the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner approached the High Court.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the relevant allotments become contemplated to be made in terms of the relevant memorandum of organisation whereby a privilege becomes conferred upon the members of the society to seek allotment of the plots registered in the name of the society. “Resultantly, this Court is not required to be either adjudging the purpose of the registration of the society, nor is required to be adjudging whether any public property which otherwise is required to be distributed to all concerned, rather even those who are not the members of the society, thus has been purportedly distributed in an unreasonable and unfair manner”, it said.

Referring to the minutes of the meeting, the Bench foundthat the requests made by the officers of HUDA, to declare them to be eligible members for the allotment of flats of HEWO, were accepted. Moreover, the said created eligibility was only in respect of the surrendered and cancelled plots. It was known to all that only upon withdrawal/surrendering of membership of the super deluxe category flat, by one Makrand Pandurang, IAS, the same would be allocated.

The fourth respondent was thus allocated membership of the Super Deluxe category flat of HEWO Scheme-II through the impugned letter. Therefore, the said condition, as per the Bench, enjoyed an aura of transparency, whereby pursuant to the relevant cancellation and surrender of membership being made by Makrand Pandurang, IAS, the said flat became aptly allotted to the third respondent.

Thus, finding no merit in the Petition, the Bench dismissed the same.

Cause Title: Dinesh Kumar v. State of Haryana and others (Neutral Citation: 2025:PHHC:049851-DB)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Manjeet Singh, Suresh Nain

Respondent: Addl. A.G., Haryana Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G. Svaneel Jaswal, Pardeep, Sr. DAG Prakash Chahar, DAG Saurabh Mago, DAG Gaurav Bansal, AAG Karan Jindal, Senior Advocate R.K. Malik, Advocates Ankur Mittal, Kushaldeep Kaur, Saanvi Singla, Aman Pal, Rajeev Sharma, Jayant Puneet Bamal, Harmanjit Singh Gill, Varun Veer Chauhan

Click here to read/download Order



Punjab & Haryana High CourtJustice Sureshwar ThakurJustice Vikas Suri

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.