Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

VIRENDER SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Virender Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-10518-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4131 (14 July 2006)

IN THE COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP NO.10518 of 2006

DATE OF DECISION: July 17, 2006

Virender Singh

....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Haryana and others

.....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.PATWALIA

PRESENT: Shri Puneet Bali, Advocate for the petitioner.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).

Notice of motion to the respondents.

On the asking of Court, Shri Ashok Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

The primary grievance made by the petitioner is that his claim with regard to allotment of a plot under the Oustee's quota has been rejected vide order dated May 29, 2006 (Annexure P.8).

However, no reasons, whatsoever, have been given in the aforesaid order.

From the perusal of the aforesaid order (Annexure P.8), we find that the grievance of the petitioner appears to be justified. In the order (Annexure P.8), whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected and the amount of earnest money has been refunded, no reasons, whatsoever, have been recorded.

Consequently, we dispose of the present petition with a direction to the Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Gurgaon to reconsider the claim of the petitioner and pass a detailed and speaking order within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is received.

In case the petitioner's claim is found to be justified, the petitioner would be at liberty to re-deposit the amount which has been ordered to be refunded vide order Annexure P.8.

A copy of the order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.

(Viney Mittal)

Judge

July 17,2006 (P.S. Patwalia)

KD 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.