Dismissed

Rajinder Pal v. Sat Pal and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Nov 2006CWP/17525/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging an order remanding a Lambardari enquiry to the District Collector to verify the respondent's residence, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana found no merit in the challenge. The Court held that verifying residence was necessary before taking a fresh decision.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; order remanding case to District Collector for residence enquiry upheld.

Rajinder Pal Vs Sat Pal and Ors. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2006)

¶1

C.W.P. No. 17525 of 2006 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

C.W.P. No. 17525 of 2006

¶4

Date of decision:November 07, 2006

¶5

Rajinder Pal

¶6

.........Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Sat Pal and Ors.

¶9

...........Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NIRMAL YADAV

¶11

Present: Mr. Sapan Dhir with Ms Samina Dhir, Advocates for the petitioners

¶12

-.-

¶13

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J (Oral)

¶14

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 24.03.2006, Annexure P-10, passed by the Principal Secretary-cumFinancial Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies, Punjab, by which the case has been remanded to the District Collector, Sangrur with a direction to enquire whether the respondent (Sat Pal) is residing in Village Rajindrapuri, Tehsil Dhuri, District Sangrur or not, and after making an enquiry, the matter pertaining to the Lambardari of the aforesaid Village, be decided afresh.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the fact that the respondent is not residing in Village Rajindrapuri, has already been decided on a number of occasions by the various authorities and, therefore, there is no reason why the matter should be again remanded.

¶16

C.W.P. No. 17525 of 2006 2

¶17

On the other hand, a perusal of the impugned orders shows that Sat Pal has categorically claimed that he is all alone residing in Village Rajindrapuri and, that the residents of the village will have no difficulty in approaching him.

¶18

In order to find out whether Sat Pal is ordinarily a resident of Village Rajindrapuri or not, the Financial Commissioner, has rightly remanded the case back to the District Collector, Sangrur, to get an enquiry done with regard to the residence of Sat Pal and, thereafter to take a fresh decision. Accordingly, we find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is dismissed.

¶19

However, the petitioner may raise all the points, as raised in the present petition, before the District Collector, Sangrur.

¶20

( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE

¶21

( NIRMAL YADAV) JUDGE

¶22

November 07, 2006 mohan

Rajinder Pal v. Sat Pal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajinder Pal v. Sat Pal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Kumar etc. Vs Comissioner Rohtak Divn.Rohtak

Jagtar Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Azad Singh Vs State of Hy.

Mewa Singh and Ors. Vs Divisional Canal Officer & Ors.

Parbhu Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Sabha Chand Vs State of Hry. and Ors.