Dismissed¶18

Phoenix Arc Limited v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Jul 2026CWP/20713/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Phoenix Arc Limited; State of Haryana & ors.; CWP-20713-2026; CWP; High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh; decision 10.07.2026; Vikas Bahl; Subhas Mehla; Article 226 Constitution of India; certiorari; TDR Certificate No.1-1669 of 91/2025 dated 31.12.2025; Annexure P-10; respondent No.5; DTCP portal/register/database; TDR transfer/utilisation; appealable impugned order; withdrawal with liberty to file fresh petition; dismissed as withdrawn. Use when tracking the fate of this TDR-certificate challenge or the refiling liberty.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition after giving full and better particulars. ¶18

Phoenix Arc Limited Vs State of Haryana — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

CWP-20713-2026

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

109 CWP-20713-2026 Date of decision: 10.07.2026

¶5

Phoenix Arc Limited ...Petitioner

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Haryana & ors.

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA

¶10

Present :- Mr. Vipul Joshi, Advocate Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Advocate Ms. Wamika Trehan, Advocate Mr. Varun Chopra, Advocate Mr. Piyush Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Addl.AG, Haryana.

¶12

VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)

¶13

Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or direction quashing/cancelling the TDR Certificate No.1-1669 of 91/2025 dated 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-10) issued in favour of respondent No.5. Further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to delete/cancel the aforesaid TDR (Annexure P-10), issued in favour of respondent No.5 in the DTCP portal/register/database (including any internal record/register maintained for TDR transactions) such that they cannot be further transferred and/or utilized in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

Learned counsel for the State has pointed out that the impugned order is appealable whereas in paragraph 25 of the petition it has not been specifically mentioned that the same is appealable order.

¶15

MONIKA VERMA 2026.07.13 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh

¶16

CWP-20713-2026

¶17

-2-

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in paragraph 15 he has made a mention but has fairly submitted that he be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition after giving full and better particulars.

¶19

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as

¶20

withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

¶21

( VIKAS BAHL ) JUDGE

¶22

10.07.2026 (SUBHAS MEHLA) monika JUDGE

¶23

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶24

MONIKA VERMA 2026.07.13 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh

Phoenix Arc Limited v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Phoenix Arc Limited v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rc Sood and Co.P.Ltd. Vs State of Hy.Etc.

Ram Mehar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Samunder Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Dalwinder Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Nirmal Singh Saini Vs State of Haryana through the Principal Secretary

Bir Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others