Subhash Saini Vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority Panchkula and Another - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1090625
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnOct-04-2013
AppellantSubhash Saini
RespondentHaryana Urban Development Authority Panchkula and Another
Excerpt:
in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh civil writ petition no.22066 of 2013 date of decision: 04.10.2013 subhash saini .....petitioner. versus haryana urban development authority, panchkula and another .....respondents. coram : hon'ble mr.justice rameshwar singh malik present : mr.b.s.mittal, advocate for the petitioner. **** rameshwar singh malik j. (oral) feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, the petitioner has approached this court, by way of instant writ petition under article 226/227 of the constitution of india, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the grievance of the petitioner was not being redressed by the respondent authorities, he finally approached respondent no.2 by way of representation dated 12.2.2013 (annexure p-5).but the same is also pending decision. he further submits that the petitioner will be satisfied in case respondent no.2 is directed to consider and decide his representation in view of the orders passed by this court kumar amit appended at annexures p-4 and p-6, within a reasonable time. 2013.10.05 09:26 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document civil writ petition no.22066 of 2013 2 having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, including the issue of limitation, if any, the administrator, haryana urban development authority, hisar-respondent no.2 is directed to look into the matter, consider the grievance of the petitioner, raised vide his representation dated 12.2.2013 (annexure p-5) and decide the same keeping in view of the order passed by this court appended at annexures p-4 as well as p-6, at an early date by passing an appropriate order thereon, in accordance with law, but in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. with the observations made above, the present petition stands disposed of. (rameshwar singh malik) judge0410.2013 ak sharma kumar amit 2013.10.05 09:26 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.22066 of 2013 Date of Decision: 04.10.2013 Subhash Saini .....Petitioner.

versus Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula and another .....Respondents.

CORAM : HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK Present : Mr.B.S.Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J.

(ORAL) Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, the petitioner has approached this Court, by way of instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the grievance of the petitioner was not being redressed by the respondent authorities, he finally approached respondent No.2 by way of representation dated 12.2.2013 (Annexure P-5).but the same is also pending decision.

He further submits that the petitioner will be satisfied in case respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide his representation in view of the orders passed by this Court Kumar Amit appended at Annexures P-4 and P-6, within a reasonable time.

2013.10.05 09:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Civil Writ Petition No.22066 of 2013 2 Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, including the issue of limitation, if any, the Administrator, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Hisar-respondent No.2 is directed to look into the matter, consider the grievance of the petitioner, raised vide his representation dated 12.2.2013 (Annexure P-5) and decide the same keeping in view of the order passed by this Court appended at Annexures P-4 as well as P-6, at an early date by passing an appropriate order thereon, in accordance with law, but in any case within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

With the observations made above, the present petition stands disposed of.

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE0410.2013 Ak Sharma Kumar Amit 2013.10.05 09:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document