Dismissed

Manglam Multiplex Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Apr 2010CWP/4028/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the petitioner, Manglam Multiplex Private Limited, to withdraw the writ petition. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation within two months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; petitioner permitted to file detailed representation with direction to decide within two months.

Manglam Multiplex Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Haryana… — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

C.W.P. No. 4028 of 2010

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Civil Writ Petition No. 4028 of 2010

¶5

Date of Decision: April 19, 2010

¶6

Manglam Multiplex Private Limited Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana and others Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

¶10

¶11

PRESENT: Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chopra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

¶13

, .J

¶14

In this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the

¶15

Constitution of India, the petitioner has inter alia, prayed for

¶16

issuance of a writ in the nature of prohibition, prohibiting the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana (respondent

¶17

¶18

C.W.P. No. 4028 of 2010

¶19

No.2) from granting licence under Section 3 of the Haryana

¶20

Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, for

¶21

setting up of Group Housing Colony/IT Park/Cyber Park or Commercial Colony, in favour of respondent No.4 and/or

¶22

respondent No.3 in respect of land measuring 124 Kanals,

¶23

situated in the revenue estate of village Siwana Mauja

¶24

Dhorka, Tehsil and District Gurgaon and also a writ of

¶25

mandamus directing respondent No.2, to consider and allow

¶26

petitioner’s application, Annexure -4, P for the grant of licence

¶27

to set up a Group Housing Colony on the land measuring 15.54 acres, situated in the revenue estate of village Dhorka,

¶28

Sector 95, Tehsil and District Gurgaon.

¶29

After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to enable him to file a detailed and comprehensive representation voicing the grievance raised

¶30

herein, to the respondents with a direction to them for

¶31

deciding the same within a fixed time frame.

¶32

¶33

C.W.P. No. 4028 of 2010

¶34

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶35

perusing the record, the writ petition is dismissed as

¶36

withdrawn. It shall, however, be open to the petitioner to file

¶37

a detailed and comprehensive representation to respondent

¶38

No.2, voicing the grievance as raised in the writ petition and

¶39

if that is so done, the same will be decided within a period

¶40

of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of

¶41

this order, after hearing the petitioner, the private respondents

¶42

and other affected persons, if any, by passing a speaking

¶43

order in accordance with law.

¶44

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)

¶45

April 19, 2010 JUDGE

¶46

RKMALIK

Manglam Multiplex Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manglam Multiplex Pvt. Ltd. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harjinder Kumar and Anr. Vs Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Rajinder Pal Gupta Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

O.P. Kathpalia Vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Lakhbir Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Rakesh Kumar Vs HUDA Panchkula and Ors.

Dr. Harnam Singh Vs Panjab University & Anr.