Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DEEPAK ARORA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Deepak Arora v. Union of India & Ors - CWP-10902-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4881 (27 July 2006)

IN THE COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP NO.10902 of 2006

DATE OF DECISION: July 20, 2006

Deepak Arora

....Petitioner

VERSUS

Union of India and others

.....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.BHALLA

PRESENT: Shri V.K.Sandhir, Advocate for the petitioner.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).

Notice of motion to the respondents.

On the asking of Court, Shri Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, standing counsel for Union of India accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2.

Shri Sukhdip Singh Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.3 to 5.

The grievance of the petitioner is that although provisional No Objection Certificate was issued by the competent authority on March 18,2004 but the matter is pending consideration and no final No Objection Certificate was issued for running the retail outlet by the petitioner. It has been contended that on the basis of the aforesaid provisional certificate, the retail outlet in question is run by the petitioner.

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, we dispose of the present petition with a liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before the Chief Conservative Forests (C ), Govt. of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Northern Regional Office, Chandigarh, respondent No.2 within a period of two weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is received by annexing all the relevant documents. On receipt of the aforesaid representation, necessary and appropriate action shall be taken by respondent No.2 within a further period of two months from the date of filing of the said representation, by passing a detailed and speaking order.

Till the matter is finally decided by the Chief Conservative Forests (C ), respondent No.2, no coercive process shall be taken against the petitioner.

(Viney Mittal)

Judge

July 20,2006 (H.S. Bhalla)

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.