The petitioner challenged an order by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, which remanded a matter regarding candidature deficiencies to the Collector. The High Court held that the Commissioner was justified in the remand as the earlier order had not examined the specific alleged deficiencies. The petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Civil Writ Petition No. 20363 of 2008 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No. 20363 of 2008 Date of decision: 03.12.2008
Om Parkash
........Petitioner
Versus
Financial Commissioner Haryana and another .......Respondent(s)
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.S.Khehar Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
-.-
Present: Mr. S C Khunger, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner
-.-
J.S.Khehar, J. (Oral)
Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the order passed by the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, dated 11.09.2008 (Annexure P-3), whereby the entire matter has been remanded back to the Collector, Fatehabad, for re-determination.
On the issue in hand, the solitary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is, that the Commissioner, Hisar Division, Hisar, in his order dated 17.04.2004 (Annexure P-2) had examined the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and passed a well reasoned speaking order obviating any requirements of a remand for re-adjudication. It is, therefore, the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, that the impugned order dated 11.09.2008 (Annexure P-3) by which, the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, remanded the matter to the Collector, Fatehabad, is liable to be set aside.
Civil Writ Petition No. 20363 of 2008 2
We have examined the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case. Insofar as respondent No. 2, Mohan Lal, is concerned, the alleged deficiencies in his candidature have been depicted in paragraph 5 of the impugned order. Whereas, the alleged deficiencies insofar as the petitioner, Om Parkash are concerned, the same have been depicted in paragraph 6 of the impugned order. Neither of these alleged deficiencies have been examined in the order passed by the Commissioner, Hisar Division, Hisar dated 17.04.2008 (Annexure P-2).
In view of the above, keeping in mind the alleged deficiencies depicted in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the impugned order dated 11.09.2008 (Annexure P-3), we are of the view, that the Financial Commissioner, Haryana, was fully justified in remanding the matter to the Collector, Fatehabad, for re-consideration.
Dismissed.
December 03, 2008 mohan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order remanding the matter to the Collector for reconsideration is liable to be set aside.
Whether the alleged deficiencies in the petitioner's and Mohan Lal's candidature were examined in the Commissioner's earlier order.
Om Parkash
Financial Commissioner Haryana
Mohan Lal
J.S. Khehar
Nirmaljit Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
