Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LEHMBER SINGH @ JAGMAL SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Lehmber Singh @ Jagmal Singh v. Union of India & Ors - CWP-13943-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 5737 (21 August 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP NO.13943 of 2006

DATE OF DECISION: September 1, 2006

Lehmber Singh @ Jagmal Singh

....Petitioner

VERSUS

Union of India and others

.....Respondents

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

PRESENT: Shri Lekh Raj Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).

Notice of motion to the respondents No.1 to 3 only.

On the asking of Court, Shri Rampal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of Shri Rajeev Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1.

On the asking of Court, Shri Sukhdip Singh Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No.2 and 3.

Copies of the writ petition have been supplied to the learned counsel for the respondents.

The petitioner has approached this Court for issuance of directions to official respondents to hand over the passport to the petitioner enabling him to return to United States of America.

The petitioner has made various allegations against the respondents No.6 and 7 and the private respondents No.8 to 19.

We do not intend to go into the correctness or otherwise of the aforesaid allegations.

However, from the perusal of the record, we find that a representation/complaint dated May 23, 2006 was addressed to the Chief Minister of Punjab, a copy whereof has also been sent to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jalandhar Range, Jalandhar, respondent No.4 and the aforesaid representation still remains unresponded.

In this view of the matter, we direct the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Jalandhar Range, Jalandhar, respondent No.4 to take a final decision on the aforesaid representation (Annexure P.12) within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is received, by passing a detailed and speaking order.

The present writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

However, we again clarify that the aforesaid directions shall not be construed to be any expression of opinion on the merits of claim made by the petitioner.

Copy dasti on payment.

(Viney Mittal)

Judge

September 1,2006 (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.