Dismissed

Ram Lal and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 May 2013CWP/4980/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition challenging a rejection of a change of land use permission. Holding that an alternative statutory remedy was available and factual issues needed recording, the High Court refrained from entertaining the petition and directed the petitioner to file an appeal under the Act.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners allowed to avail statutory remedy of appeal under Section 10 of the Act; writ petition disposed of.

Ram Lal and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CWP No. 4980 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 4980 of 2013

¶5

Date of Decision: 14.5.2013

Ram Lal and others

....Petitioners.

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶10

...Respondents.

¶11

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

¶12

PRESENT: Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶14

The primary challenge in this writ petition is to order dated 27.3.2009 (Annexure P-15) whereby application for grant of permission of change of land use had been rejected by the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana.

¶15

Section 10 of the Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (in short “the Act”) provides for appeals against order of the Director passed under Sub-Section (2) of Section 8 of the Act granting permission or licence or refusing to grant licence which reads as under:-

¶16

“”10. Appeals- Any person aggrieved or affected by an order of the Directors under sub-section (2) of Section 8 granting permission or licence subject to conditions or refusing permission or licence may,

¶17

CWP No. 4980 of 2013 -2-

¶18

within sixty days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department whose orders on such appeal shall be final.”

¶19

In view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioners and keeping in view the fact that the factual finding is required to be recorded before deciding the matter, we refrain from entertaining the present petition and relegate the petitioner to the remedy of appeal as provided under the Act.

¶20

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of by allowing the petitioners to avail their statutory remedy of appeal under Section 10 of the Act before the competent authority in accordance with law.

¶21

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

¶22

May 14, 2013 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) gbs JUDGE

Ram Lal and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Lal and Ors. 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

Kulwant Singh Vs Mc Patiala & Anr.

Daya Ram and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Raghbir Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Rajwanti Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Suman Saini & Others Vs State of Haryana and Another

State of Haryana Vs Jitender Kumar and Ors.