Disposed

Surender Kumar Rathee v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Nov 2010CWP/19563/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order disposing a writ petition disputing denial of a completion certificate. The court directed the Estate Officer to communicate the exact extent of violation, allowing the petitioner to remove excess construction within one month before issuing the certificate.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Estate Officer to communicate violation within two weeks; petitioner to remove excess construction within one month thereafter.

Surender Kumar Rathee Vs State of Haryana… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP. No. 19563 of 2010 Date of Decision: 17.11.2010.

¶3

Dr. Surender Kumar Rathee

¶4

--Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Haryana and others

¶7

--Respondents

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI.

¶9

Present:Mr. A.K. Rathee, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

¶11

PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL)

¶12

Notice of motion.

¶13

Mr. R.D. Sharma, D.A.G., Haryana and Mr. Ajay Nara, Advocate present in the Court have been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents no.1 & 2 to 4 respectively.

¶14

Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself.

¶15

The petitioner is aggrieved of the memo dated 20.10.2010, whereby he has been denied the completion certificate and has also been asked to remove the excess covered area beyond the permissible compoundable limits in violation of the building/zoning plan, failing which the same shall be removed at the risk and cost of the petitioner. From the impugned order it appears that the petitioner has allegedly raised construction in the set back area beyond the permissible limits, however, the exact violation has not been intimated.

¶16

CWP. No. 19563 of 2010 -2-

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to remove the excess construction beyond the permissible/compoundable limits, if, communicated to the petitioner.

¶18

In view of the submission made on behalf of the petitioner, this

¶19

petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶20

The Estate Officer, H.U.D.A, Jagadhari will communicate to the petitioner the extent of violation/excess construction beyond the permissible/compoundable limits, within a period of two weeks.

¶21

On receipt of the communication petitioner shall remove the excess construction beyond the compoundable limits, within a period of one month, thereafter at his own cost and rectify, if, there is any other defect as may be pointed out by the Estate Officer, within the aforesaid period.

¶22

On removal/rectification of the violation, H.U.D.A will issue completion certificate in accordance with law within the prescribed period.

¶23

(PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE

¶24

17.11.2010. lucky

Surender Kumar Rathee v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surender Kumar Rathee v. State of Haryana 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

Ram Kishan Vs U.H.B.V.N.L and Ors.

Rajinder Singh Rathee Vs Union of India and Ors.

The Delhi Coop Group Housing Society Vs State of Haryana an Dors

Dilbag Singh and Ors. Vs Haryana Vidyut Parsaran Nigam Ltd.

M/S Armaan Auto Components Vs Haryana State Industrial Dev. & Inf. Corpn & Anr.

Kehar Singh Vs HUDA & Anr,.