Simranjit Singh v. Union Of India And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 10173 of 2022 Date of Decision:- 18.05.2022 SIMRANJIT SINGH ....Petitioner vs.

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ....Respondents *** BEFORE :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL *** Present:- Petitioner in person.

Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate, for respondent No.1-Union of India.

Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent No.9.

*** Sudhir Mittal, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved because respondent No.21 has been allotted a retail outlet by respondent No.9.

Applications were invited for a retail outlet to be set up at village Sansarpur, District Jalandhar, whereafter respondent No.21 was declared successful after following the procedure prescribed by law. The relevant authorities have issued NOCs and the retail outlet has been commissioned. According to the petitioner, the NOCs were wrongly issued. Various guidelines have been violated regarding provision of access to the main road and regarding separation from an existing outlet. The construction has been raised without sanction of any building plan. A detailed representation has also been submitted bringing these and other facts to the notice of the official respondents but no action has been taken.

POONAM RATHORE 2022.05.20 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

C.W.P. No. 10173 of 2022 -2No site plan has been placed on record to show that the access to the main road is not proper or is in violation of the relevant guidelines. There is also no material to show that distance from an existing outlet is less than that provided by the guidelines. Assuming that it is so, the relevant guidelines are only directory and not mandatory. It is for the competent authority to permit another outlet to come up at a lesser distance than that prescribed provided safety is not compromised. Regarding non-sanction of building plan, no rule/regulation has been brought to my notice which provides for sanction of a building plan by the local authorities. The writ petition appears to have been filed on account of some personal vendetta. Necessary and relevant details have not been furnished and, thus, the petitioner cannot be granted the desired relief.

Accordingly, the writ petition has no merit and is dismissed. May 18, 2022 ( SUDHIR MITTAL) poonam JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No POONAM RATHORE 2022.05.20 11:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment