Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUBHASH CHANDER NAYYAR versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Subhash Chander Nayyar v. State of Punjab & anr. - CWP-18963-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 5882 (24 August 2006)

C.W.P NO. 18963 OF 2005 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

* * * * *

C.W.P NO. 18963 OF 2005

Date of decision : July 20, 2006

* * * * *

Subhash Chander Nayyar ............Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab & anr. ...........Respondents * * * * *

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

* * * * *

Present: Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Sukhdip Singh Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.

Mr. Govind Goel, Advocate for respondent no.2.

* * * * *

Viney Mittal, J. (Oral)

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that although a paper possession was handed over to the petitioner qua industrial plot in question, but at the sopt there is Smadh and a Peepal Tree and as such, the petitioner has not been able to raise any construction at the said plot and use the same.

From the perusal of the stand taken by the respondents, we find that the aforesaid fact is not disputed.

Keeping in view the aforesaid grievance and various other pleas raised by the petitioner, we dispose of the present petition with a request to the Managing Director, Punjab Small Industries and Export C.W.P NO. 18963 OF 2005 [2]

Corporation Ltd-respondent no.2 to look into the grievance made by the petitioner and take an appropriate decision thereupon. For the aforesaid purpose, the petitioner shall be required to file a detailed and comprehensive representation by annexing all the relevant doucments, with respondent no.2, within a period of 4 weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is recieved. On receipt of the aforesaid representation, the Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation shall take a final decision thereupon within a further period of 4 months, thereafter, by passing a detailed and speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

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

( VINEY MITTAL )

JUDGE

July 20, 2006 ( H.S BHALLA )

ritu 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.