Disposed

Ashok Vatika Public School v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 May 2013CWP/10114/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged the Trust's acquisition process, asking for formal exemption of its building based on a prior order quashing similar resolutions. The Court directed the Trust to consider the claim via a speaking order after a hearing within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Improvement Trust, Amritsar to consider the petitioner's claim for property exemption by passing a speaking order after a hearing within two months.

Ashok Vatika Public School Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CWP No. 10114 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 10114 of 2013 Date of Decision: 10.5.2013

¶5

Ashok Vatika Public School

¶6

....Petitioner.

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

...Respondents.

¶10

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA.

¶11

PRESENT: Mr. Vinod Kumar Kaushal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶13

In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners prays for issuance of directions to the Improvement Trust, Amritsar (in short “the Trust”) to formally exempt its built-up property/building from acquisition process of '340 Acres Area Development Scheme'.

¶14

The petitioner has sought the abovesaid relief on the basis that the resolutions passed by the Trust on 30.3.2000 and 20.12.2000 (Annexures P-1 and P-2, respectively) superseding its earlier resolution dated 24.7.1995 passed by the Trust was subject matter of challenge before this Court in CWP No. 2077 of 2001, M/s Woolen Processors Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Punjab and others and other connected matters and the same was quashed by this Court vide order dated 25.2.2002. The case of the petitioner is that a similarly placed proprietor of the

¶15

CWP No. 10114 of 2013

¶16

-2-

¶17

building, namely, Harcharan Singh Bhatti, filed CWP No. 6646 of 2009, Harcharan Singh Bhatti v. The State of Punjab and another which was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.2.2010 and the Special Leave Petition preferred by the Trust has also been dismissed on 16.11.2010 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though similarly placed building/property has been exempted from acquisition but his existing structure has not been formally excluded by the Trust from the acquisition process despite various representations made by the petitioner including dated 4.12.2012 and 21.3.2013 (Annexures P-11 and P-12, respectively).

¶18

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Improvement Trust, Amritsar-respondent No.2 to consider the claim of the petitioner regarding exemption of its existing building/property from the acquisition process by passing a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law.

¶19

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

¶20

May 10, 2013 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) gbs JUDGE

Ashok Vatika Public School v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Vatika Public School v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

O.P. Goyal & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Raj Kumar Jain Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Karam Singh Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Surjit Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shodhan Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Shree Shyamji Transport Company Vs State of Haryana and Ors.