Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KAPOOR CHAND JAIN versus THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVT.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Kapoor Chand Jain v. The Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. - CWP-4379-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 1706 (16 March 2006)

CWP NO.4379 OF 2006 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP NO.4379 OF 2006

DATE OF DECISION:21.03.2006

Kapoor Chand Jain ....Petitioner

Versus

The Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. of Haryana and others .... Respondents.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S. KHEHAR
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N. AGGARWAL

PRESENT: Mr.Sushil Jain, Advocate

for the petitioner.

J.S. Khehar, J. (oral)

The industrial plot bearing No.443 at the Industrial Estate, Barhi, in district Sonepat, was allotted to the petitioner. Subsequently, in place of plot No.443, the petitioner was allotted plot No.96. Thereafter, after issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner, the plot allotted to the petitioner was resumed by an order dated 1.3.2005. Dissatisfied with the action of the authorities, in resuming the plot allotted to him, the petitioner allegedly filed an appeal against the order dated 1.3.2005. The appeal filed by the petitioner is stated to be still pending despite the fact that it was filed as far back as on 17.3.2005.

Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus to the appellate authority requiring it to dispose of the appeal preferred by the petitioner on CWP NO.4379 OF 2006 2

17.3.2005.

In view of the above, without going into the merits of the claim raised by the petitioner, we consider it just and appropriate to dispose of the instant writ petition by directing the appellate authority to take a final decision on the appeal preferred by the petitioner on 17.3.2005 (Annexure P11), by passing a well reasoned speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. .

Disposed of accordingly.

Order dasti on payment of usual charges.

( J.S. Khehar )

Judge

( S.N. Aggarwal )

March 21, 2006. Judge

vig


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.