In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered the Haryana Government to pay ₹5 lakh in compensation to a retired Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) employee, Yashendra Singh, for arbitrarily denying him a Super Deluxe flat, despite his rightful eligibility.
The ruling was passed by a division bench comprising Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri, which found that the denial of the flat to the petitioner was unjustified and contradicted the official records.
Read also: SC Confirms IMNS Officers Entitled to Ex-Servicemen Benefits Under Punjab Rules
Background of the Case
Yashendra Singh, a former Estate Officer with HUDA (now HSVP), had applied in 2005 under a housing scheme launched by the Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP) for a Super Deluxe flat in Faridabad. At that time, he deposited an earnest amount of ₹1,98,500. However, he was declared ineligible for the Super Deluxe category and was instead allotted a flat under the Deluxe category.
Despite this, Singh continuously pursued his case and submitted several representations. In 2018, a governing body decision acknowledged his entitlement and assured him the first available surplus flat in the Super Deluxe category during the re-planning process.
In April 2021, HSVP issued a notification inviting applications for two Super Deluxe flats, ignoring the earlier assurance made to Singh. He filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the letter dated 13.04.2021 and sought enforcement of the governing body’s decision from 08.01.2018.
His contention was that despite an increase in the number of Super Deluxe flats from 64 to 65 after re-planning, his rightful claim was ignored and allotments were made to other employees who were not eligible or hadn’t even applied in response to the original advertisement.
The Court carefully examined the sequence of events, documents, and meeting records. It noted:
“Though the present petitioner was not found eligible in 2005, he was later considered eligible as per pay norms, and the 2018 decision explicitly stated that on availability of the very first surplus flat in Super Deluxe category, his membership would be upgraded.”
The bench further highlighted:
“Despite the increase in the number of flats and the petitioner’s clear eligibility, he was bypassed, which is completely contradictory to the facts existing on record.”
The Court termed the action of the authorities as discriminatory and arbitrary.
“The act of the respondents concerned is discriminatory, arbitrary and illegal.”
“Despite availability of the surplus flat, the respondents, instead of allotting the same to the petitioner, floated the same for draw of lots.”
“The amount furnished as earnest money by the petitioner be forthwith refunded to him along with interest accrued thereon @ 8% per annum.”
“Moreover also, compensation comprised in a sum of Rs. 5.00 lakhs be also paid to the present petitioner by the respondent concerned for the pain and agony encumbered upon him.”
Although the court refrained from disturbing the existing allotments already made in 2021, it delivered substantial relief to the petitioner through the following directions:
- Refund of earnest money along with 8% interest per annum.
- Payment of ₹5,00,000 as compensation.
- Direction to carry out the re-planning process without delay.
- Ensure the petitioner’s case is duly considered when Super Deluxe flats increase due to re-planning.
“As and when on account of re-planning there is an increase in the number of Super Deluxe category flats, the petitioner shall, in accordance with law, become considered for allotment thereof after all the codal formalities are completed.”
Dr. Surya Parkash, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G., Ms. Svaneel Jaswal, Addl. A.G, Mr. Pardeep Prakash Chahar, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. Saurabh Mago, DAG, Haryana,
Mr. Gaurav Bansal, DAG, Haryana and Mr. Karan Jindal, AAG, Haryanafor the respondent-State.
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate, Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate and Ms. Saanvi Singla, Advocate
for the respondent-HSVP.
Title: Yashendra Singh v. State of Haryana
