Disposed

Ranjit Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Nov 2014CWP/24340/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition concerning the extension of the 'Lal Dora'/'outer phirni' of the petitioner's village, directing the respondent authorities to verify the claim and decide within six months without expressing views on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent Nos.1 & 2 to verify the petitioner's claim and take an appropriate decision within six months.

Ranjit Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.24340 of 2014 Date of Decision: November 28, 2014

Ranjit Singh

.....Petitioner

versus

State of Haryana and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.

¶9

Present: Mr.MS Chauhan, Advocate, for

¶10

Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

-.-

¶12

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

¶16

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶17

The petitioner is resident of village Azizulapur, Tehsil and District Panipat. He seeks a mandamus to direct the respondent-authorities to extend the 'Lal Dora'/'outer phirni' of the village. After referring to various provisions contained in different Statutes including a Bill which the State Legislature had passed for the specific purpose of extension of 'Lal Dora'/'outer phirni' of the rural areas, the petitioner submits that having regard to the expansion of his village, the 'Lal Dora' /'outer phirni' deserves to be extended.

¶18

We find from the record that such a claim has already been raised by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, Panipat, vide representation dated 10.02.2014 (Annexure P-5).

¶19

We thus, dispose of this writ petition, however, without expressing any views on the merits of the petitioner's

¶20

MOHINDER KUMAR 2014.12.09 12:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶21

CWP No.24340 of 2014 [2]

¶22

claim, with a direction to respondent Nos.1 & 2 to verify the above-mentioned claim of the petitioner and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, within a period of six months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

¶23

Ordered accordingly.

¶24

Dasti.

¶25

November 28, 2014 [RAJ MOHAN SINGH] Mohinder JUDGE

¶26

MOHINDER KUMAR 2014.12.09 12:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Ranjit Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhajan Devi Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam and Ors.

Mukand Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab etc.

Gurdeep Singh Vs Director, Rural Development and Panchayat Punjab and Ors.

Chandigarh Administration and Anr. Vs Durgesh Sharma and Anr.

Mewa Singh Vs D.R.D.P. etc.

Gurdhian Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.