Gobind Ram v. Estate Officer, Chandigarh Administration, U.T. Chandigarh

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Apr 2013CWP/12324/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal diverted from Court; petitioner permitted to withdraw petition with liberty to challenge rejection order via appeal under Chandigarh Rules. Appellate Authority directed to consider appeal on merits.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw petition with liberty to appeal; direction to Appellate Authority to consider the appeal on merits.

Gobind Ram Vs Estate Officer, Chandigarh… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP No. 12324 of 2012 DATE OF DECISION : 03.04.2013

¶3

Gobind Ram

¶4

.... PETITIONER

¶5

Versus

¶6

Estate Officer, Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh

¶7

..... RESPONDENT

¶8

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH

¶9

Present: Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. I.P.S. Doabia, Advocate, for the respondent.

¶11

¶12

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. ( Oral )

¶13

The petitioner has filed the instant petition for issuing direction to the respondent to consider his claim for allotment of a Booth under the Allotment/Transfer of Built up Booths in any Sector on Lease/Hire Purchase basis in Chandigarh Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as `the Rules').

¶14

In the written statement filed by the respondent, it has been stated that claim of the petitioner has been considered under the Rules and the same has been rejected on certain grounds.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid averment made in the written statement, learned counsel for the petitioner states that if copy of the aforesaid order rejecting the claim of the petitioner is made available by the

¶16

CWP No. 12324 of 2012

¶17

-2-

¶18

respondent, then the petitioner intends to file appeal against the same under the Rules. Learned counsel for the respondent undertakes to supply copy of the the aforesaid order to the petitioner within a period of two weeks.

¶19

In view of the aforesaid stand taken by learned counsel for the respondent, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to challenge the said order rejecting the claim of the petitioner, by filing appeal under the Rules.

¶20

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. If the petitioner files appeal against the order rejecting his claim within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of the said order, the Appellate Authority is directed to consider the appeal on merits, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶21

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE

¶22

April 03, 2013 ( AMOL RATTAN SINGH ) ndj JUDGE

Gobind Ram v. Estate Officer, Chandigarh Administration, U.T. Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gobind Ram v. Estate Officer, Chandigarh Administration, U.T. Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kashmir Masih @ Gopi Vs State of Punjab

Parveen Vs State of Haryana

Sukhchet Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Sarvhitkari Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Tradex India Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs Haryana Urban Development Authority and Ors.

Jai Pal Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.