Disposed

Dishant D. Tuteja v. Union of India and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Feb 2014CWP/2298/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A PIL was filed by a law student seeking a reduction in toll tax rates. The High Court held the matter to be within policy domain, outside judicial intervention, but directed authorities to examine the material and decide within two months.

What did the court decide?

None granted; authorities directed to examine material and decide on toll tax revision within two months.

Dishant D. Tuteja Vs Union of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

I N THE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI GARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.2298 of 2014 (O&M)

¶3

DATE OF DECI SI ON: 07.02.2014

Dishant D. Tuteja

…..Petitioner

versus

Union of India and others

¶8

.....Respondents

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTI CE SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE ARUN PALLI

¶10

Present: Petitioner in person

¶11

SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL, CHI EF JUSTI CE : (Oral)

¶12

The petitioner, a student of law, has filed the public interest litigation seeking calculation of toll tax in the m anner he feels it should be calculated as per rules. He, thus, seeks quashing of the higher rate of toll tax imposed at two toll barriers in question.

¶13

We are of the view that the matter squarely falls within a policy domain and cannot call for judicial intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, we are not averse to the material placed by the petitioner on record being examined by the concerned authorities for purposes of considering whether the toll tax needs to be revised in view of what has been set out in the petition itself.

¶14

We, thus, call upon the concerned respondents to examine the material placed before us through this petition and to take a considered decision on the same within a maximum period of two months from today, the decision being communicated to petitioner with reasons. Petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶15

Chand Parkash 2014.02.07 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CW P- 2298 - 2014

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

Copies of the complete petition be supplied to Ms. Anju Arora, Standing Counsel for Union of India and Mr. Ajay Gupta, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, who are present in Court.

¶19

Copy of order be given dasti under signatures of Bench Secretary to learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

( SANJAY KI SHAN KAUL ) CHI EF JUSTI CE

¶21

07.02.2014 ( ARUN PALLI ) parkash* JUDGE

¶22

Chand Parkash 2014.02.07 16:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Dishant D. Tuteja v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dishant D. Tuteja v. Union of India 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

Bal Krishan Vs Cat & Ors.

Manjit Kaur and Anr. Vs the St of Pb & Ors.

Mohinder Singh and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Harminder Singh and Ors. Vs UOI and Ors.

Veena and Ors. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Court on Its Own Motion Vs State of Punjab and Ors.