R.C. Chawla v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Leave granted. As per the orders of this Court passed earlier, if the appellant wants to avail of the allotment, he necessarily has to comply with the conditions of allotment . Consequently, he cannot use allotted residential premises for commercial purpose. The appellant has filed an affidavit verified on January 4, 1996 stating, among other things, thus : "Thal as per the order of Honourable Supreme Court of India, I have got the conunercial use of my house stopped w.e.f. 2.1.96. The above statement is true to the best of my knowledge." H The learned counsel for the respondents states that he does not have 466 R.C. CHAWLA v. STATE 467 any inforn1ation as to what was the action taken by the authorities in that A behalf. Sri S.K. Bagga, the learned counsel has shown to the learned counsel for the respondents that the statement also was communicated to the HUDA and the respondents. The respondents are at liberty to verify whether the appellant had stopp6d use of the premises for commercial use w.e.f. January 2, 1996 and on being so satisfied, they are directed to withdraw the B impugned resumption order. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs. G.N. Appeal disposed of.