Punjab and Haryana HC pulls up HUDA for ‘creating confusion’

[related-post]

“The case is lingering since 2013 and time (to probe and file reply) is always given as per HUDA’s convenience,” observed the court.

The court also took a serious note of the absence of HUDA’s Chief Administrator (CA) Brijendra Singh despite court directions. It said: “It appears that the CA is taking it casually and “only casual report is filed which does not show there is any progress in the case.”

Justice Chaudhary ordered “the CA, HUDA to present in court and explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him”.

During the arguments, the counsel of the Haryana government informed the court that till date as many as 308 cases have been registered across the state against 565 persons; in 16 cases, cancellation reports have been filed after allegations were found to be false.

It was informed that in 121 cases, chargesheets have been filed before respective courts.

Petitioner Dharam Singh Yadav’s counsel Narender Singh, however, submitted that though chargesheets have been filed in the case, roles of HUDA officials, including the alleged connivance of then estate officers, has not been looked into.

On this, the court directed the state government to take permission from the respective trial courts, investigate the role of HUDA officials and then file supplementary chargesheets there.

Justice Chuadhary also observed that “nothing has been mentioned (by HUDA and state government) how the probe is being conducted”.

“Nowhere it is mentioned whether allottees had filed affidavits in consonance of policies or concealed something. Some of the allottees had filed affidavits by concealing family plots and dependent family members,” he added.