Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUKHWINDER SINGH & ORS versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sukhwinder Singh & Ors v. State of Punjab & Ors - CWP-2916-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 2508 (24 April 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.W.P. No. 2916 of 2004

Date of decision: April 20,2006

Sukhwinder Singh and others V. State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRITAM PAL

Present: Shri Gurcharan Dass, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Ambika Luthra, Advocate,for the respondents.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral)

Learned counsel for the petitioners informs that petitioners No.3,4 and 5 have already deposited the entire outstanding dues against them but they have not been issued 'No Objection Certificate' by the Estate Officer,respondent No.3. Learned counsel further states that petitioners No.1,2 and 6 have not deposited any amount and are not so required to deposit the same in view of the law down by in Civil Writ Petition No.13648 of 1998 decided on May 4,1999 ( Tahal Singh and others V. State of Punjab and others) and other connected matters.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we direct Chief Administrator, Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority,respondent No.2 to reconsider the claim of the petitioners in the light of the judgment in Tahal Singh's case (supra) and take a final decision thereupon . The petitioner shall file a detailed representation before the Chief Administrtor, PUDA within a period of four weeks from the day a certified copy of this order is received. On receipt of the aforesaid representation, the Chief Administrator shall reconsider the claim of the petitioners in the light of the judgment in Tahal Singh's case (supra) within a period of four months thereafter by passing a detailed speaking order.

Necessary follow up action thereafter shall also be taken by the Chief Administrator.

A copy of this order order be given dasti on usual charges.

(Viney Mittal )

Judge

April 20,2006 ( Pritam Pal )

sks Judge

(Viney Mittal )

Judge

April 20,2006 ( Pritam Pal )

sks Judge


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.