Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-20-2012
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.15786 of 1999 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 20, 2012 **** M/S.Vijayant Travels & Anr. . . Petitioners versus State of Punjab & ORS.. . Respondents **** CORAM: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HONBLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. **** Present: Mr.MS Khaira, Senior Advocate; Mr.Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate; Mr.DS Kamra, Advocate; Mr.Dharminder Singh, Advocate; Mr.Rajender Sharma, Advocate; Mr.PS Bawa, Advocate; Mr.Vishal Sharma, Advocate; for the PETITIONER(s) Mr.Amol Rattan Singh, Addl. AG Punjab assisted by Mr.Daman Dhir, Advocate Mr.Ravi Dutt Sharma, DAG Haryana Mr.Baldev Kapoor, Advocate and Mr.Rohit Kapoor, Advocate Mr.Anupam Singla, Advocate (in CWP-8783-2012) for PRTC/PEPSU Mr.Vijay Rana, Advocate for respondent No.16 (in CWP-13624-2009) **** CWP No.1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-20-2012
Civil Writ Petition No.8697 of 2009 (O&M) :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 20 , 2012 Shri Dhanwantry Educational Society, Ayurvedic College and Dabur Dhanwantry Ayurvedic Hospital, Sector 46-D, Chandigarh .....Petitioner VERSUS Panjab University, Sector 14, Chandigarh & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. PRESENT: Mr.Amar Vivek, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CWP No.8697 of 2009).Mr.Rajiv Atma Ram, Senior Advocate with Mr.Arjun Pratap Atma Ram, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CWP No.17592 of 2010. Mr.Gurminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CWP No.16219 of 2012).Mr.Sukhdeep S.Sandhu, Advocate, Central Government Standing Counsel, for the Union of India. Ms.Anu Chatrath Kapur, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr.Atul Arya, Adv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-03-2012
Mehinder Singh Sullar , J. 1. As identical questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide all the cases of petitioners-accused (developers), depicted in Schedule A and those of subsequent vendees/transferees, mentioned in Schedule B (attached herewith), by virtue of this common judgment, in order to avoid the repetition. However, the relevant facts and material, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petitions, extracted from main petitions (1) CRM No. M-51514 of 2007 titled as “M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Haryana State Pollution Control Board” of Schedule 'A' and (2) CRM No. M-880 of 2010 titled as “Arvinder S.Brara Vs. Haryana State Pollution Control Board” of Schedule 'B', would be referred in subsequent part of this judgment for ready reference in this context. 2. Exhibiting the deep concern of degradation of environmental indisci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-20-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.22826 of 2012. [O&M].Date of Decision: December 20, 2012. Ramesh Kumar & ORS.Petitioners through Mr.Amar Vivek, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & ORS.Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. SURYA KANT, J. The petitioners while challenging the vires of Section 2[c].of the Punjab Package Deal of Properties [Disposal].Amendment Act, 2009 whereby the definition of 'Standard Acre' contained in Section 2[3].of the Punjab Package Deal [Properties].Act, 1976 has been amended, also seek quashing of the orders dated 30.03.2010 and 25.08.2010 [Annexures P-2 and P-1 respectively].[2].Before we advert to the main issue, the facts giving rise to these proceedings may be briefly noticed. Gurdas Mal, who was prede...
Tag this Judgment!