High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/8809/2020disposed of

Leo Wet Blue Leather Private Limited v. State Of Punjab And Another

2020-06-29Mrs Justice Daya Chaudhary,Mrs. Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta2 pages

C.W.P. No.8809 of 2020 ..1..

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.8809 of 2020 Date of Decision: 29th June, 2020 Leo Wet Blue Leather Private Limited

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab & Anr.

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Present:

Mr.Gursimran Singh Madaan Advocate, for the petitioner.

DAYA CHAUDHARY (ORAL) Prayer in this petition is for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to allow the petitioner-company to run its unit in view of the consent letter dated 22.06.2020 (Annexure P-4).

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is at par with the firm which filed CWP No.7687 of 2020 titled as "Lakshay International Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab & Anr." decided on 15th June, 2020. In that petition, direction was issued to the respondents to restore the electricity as well as water connection subject to clearance of all dues and fulfillment of formalities as required. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a representation dated 23.06.2020 (Annexure P-6) was also moved by the petitioner before SEEMA SHARMA 2020.06.29 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

C.W.P. No.8809 of 2020 ..2..

respondent No.2. He further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case directions are issued by this Court to take action on its representation dated 23.06.2020 (Annexure P-6). Keeping in view the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner; the fact that consent has been given by the petitioner and the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment dated 15.06.2020 passed in Lakshay International Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. case (supra), the present petition also stand disposed of in the same terms. Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner and take necessary action in accordance with law as well as by considering the above-said judgment within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (DAYA CHAUDHARY) JUDGE (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE 29.06.2020.

seema Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No SEEMA SHARMA 2020.06.29 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document