HUDA: Vaidya’s case not double allotment
Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, August 21
Just about two months after former Army chief General Arun Shridhar Vaidya’s daughter Tarini Vaidya moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court against “unnecessary” dragging of their name in the multiple plots allotment case, HUDA on Tuesday admitted it was not a case of double allotment.
Appearing before Justice Daya Chaudhary’s Bench, HUDA Chief Administrator stated Tarini was a major at the time of allotment and their case did not fall in the multiple-allotment category. The Bench was assured that no action would be taken.
Appearing on behalf of the petitioners, counsel Harmanjit Singh Sethi submitted that the father-daughter duo was named in an attempt to lend weight to their claims of acting fair. Taking note of the statement, Justice Chaudhary allowed Tarini’s plea.
Gen Vaidya had led Operation Bluestar in 1984. Seeking directions for making her a party-respondent, Tarini had claimed HUDA acknowledged they were father-daughter. Yet, their names were shown in the list of husband and wife allottees.
In her plea through counsel Manpreet Singh Sawhney, Tarini had asserted that she was earning when she had applied. The gap between allotment of plots to her and her father was 10 years.
She said HUDA earlier submitted a status report on husbands and wives with double allotment. “The name of the applicant figured, along with that of her late father Arun S. Vaidya, wherein his plot was shown to have been allotted in 1976 and that of the applicant in 1986,” she asserted.
Tarini had submitted that unnecessary mentioning of their names caused “great pain and anguish”, particularly when the allotment was neither double, nor against policy or rules. The same was true in father’s case.
She had further submitted that she and her father were “independent individuals being separate legal entities” allotted plots at different points in time with a significant time difference of 10 years between the allotments.
Tarini had added that she was a 22-year-old adult in 1986 working with a top multinational bank and had access to independent income and funds. The applicant added that she was getting paid sufficiently to shell out for the plot’s allotment out of her own earnings.
