Disposed

Ram Shah & Others v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 May 2018CWP/13378/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning illegal collection of parking/entry fees at Dana Mandi Salem Tabri, the High Court, without expressing an opinion on merits, directed the tendered authority to decide the petitioners' representation within 15 days by passing a speaking order after affording a hearing opportunity

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of by directing respondent No.4 to decide the petitioners' representation within 15 days via a speaking order after a hearing.

Ram Shah & Others Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CWP-13378-2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP-13378-2018

¶5

Date of Decision: 24.5.2018

Ram Shah and others

....Petitioners.

Versus

State of Punjab and others

¶10

...Respondents.

¶11

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE.

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA

¶13

PRESENT: Mr. Chetan Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Varun Issar, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶14

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, ACJ.

¶15

In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a direction to the official respondents to take action against respondent No.3 who himself was claiming to be managing the parking through the contract dated 20.4.2018 (Annexure P-2) without there being any designated parking zone/site.

¶16

Respondent No.4 vide Notice Inviting Tender dated 2.3.2018 (Annexure P-1) invited the tenders for contract of parking of Dana Mandi Salem Tabri for a period of one year from 1.4.2018 to 31.3.2019. In response thereto, respondent No.3 had applied and was granted the contract of parking vide agreement dated 20.4.2018 (Annexure P-2). Respondent No.3 had been demanding entry/goodna tax from the persons entering the Mandi as is clear from the photographs, Annexure P-3. The petitioners

¶17

Gurbachan Singh 2018.05.28 17:29 moved a representation dated 2.5.2018 (Annexure P-4) to the Secretary, I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CWP-13378-2018 -2-

¶19

Market Committee, Ludhiana regarding charging of illegal entry fees under the garb of parking fees from the entry points of the mandi, but to no effect. Thereafter, several protests by the shopkeepers, residents and the truck unions were held as is clear from the newspaper clipping dated 28.4.2018 (Annexure P-5). As per the site plan, Annexure P-6, there are designated parking earmarked but there is no authority of collection of parking fee and the same is being collected at all the entry/exit points instead of the parking area. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioners have moved a representation dated 2.5.2018 (Annexure P-4) to the Secretary, Market Committee, Ludhiana, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

¶21

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by directing respondent No.4 to take a decision on the representation dated 2.5.2018 (Annexure P-4), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and respondent No.3 within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

¶22

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶23

May 24, 2018 (TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) gbs JUDGE

¶24

Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶25

Gurbachan Singh 2018.05.28 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ram Shah & Others v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Shah & Others v. State of Punjab & 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

Awan Kumar Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

S.M.Constructions Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Prem Chand Vs Food Corporation of India and Anr.

Balwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Christian Welfare Society Vs State of Punjab etc.

Gursewak Singh Jawaharke Vs Union of India and Ors.