Remanded

Parmjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Jul 2011CWP/16096/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a writ of certiorari to quash an order cancelling an auction of plots. The High Court allowed the petition, setting aside the non-reasoned order and remanding the matter to the Administrator for a fresh decision.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 07.08.2008 set aside; matter remanded to Administrator for fresh decision within three months with liberty to raise pleas.

Parmjit Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Criminal Misc. No. M-16096 of 2008

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc. No. M-16096 of 2008 Date of decision : 15.07.2011

¶5

Parmjit Singh and others

¶6

....Petitioners

¶7

V/s

¶8

State of Punjab and others

¶9

....Respondents

¶10

BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr. Ashok Saini, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.

¶13

RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL)

¶14

This is a petition under Article 226/227of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 07.08.2008 (Annexure P-1) whereby the auction of certain plots in the New Mandi Township, Batala have been cancelled.

¶15

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that impugned order is not a reasoned order. It is not clear from the said order as to how the authority came to the conclusion that certain persons desirous of purchasing plots have been deprived of the opportunity. He further submits that during the pendency of writ petition, the petitioners have got a copy of the Compact Disc (C.D.) whereby videography of the auction was done. According to him, same shows that there was no illegality at the time auction in question was held. He has prayed that in view of the fact that

¶16

Criminal Misc. No. M-16096 of 2008

¶17

¶18

order Annexure P-1 is non-speaking, the matter may be remanded back to the same authority for consideration afresh with liberty to the petitioners to produce the record including C.D. available with them and to raise all their pleas.

¶19

This prayer is not opposed by learned State counsel. He submits that all pleas of the petitioners including videography, if any, shall be taken into consideration by the said authority and fresh order shall be passed.

¶20

In view of above, order dated 07.08.2008 (Annexure P-1) is set-aside with liberty to the petitioners to appear before the Administrator and raise all their pleas. Appropriate decision in this regard be taken within a period of three months from today.

¶21

It is, however, made clear that no right under the auction held on said plots shall accrue to the petitioners till the decision of the case afresh.

¶22

A copy of the order be handed over to learned State counsel under the signatures of Bench Secretary.

¶23

July 15, 2011 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE

Parmjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmjit Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & 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

Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Usha Rani Vs State of Haryana

Tirath Ram Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Ved Parkash Vs State of Punjab etc.

Manjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Shalini Gulati Vs Ut of Chandigarh & Ors.