P S Sawhney v. Rajinder Ghai And ANR

CROCP-4-2018 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CROCP-4-2018 (O&M) Decided on: January 11, 2019.

P.S.Sawhney .. Petitioner

VERSUS

Rajinder Ghai and Anr.

.. Respondent * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI * * * PRESENT None for the petitioner.

JASWANT SINGH, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against respondent Rajinder Ghai Ex-Senior Law Officer, Chandigarh Housing Board, on the allegations that the respondent had falsified his address and obtained the house in Chandigarh by fraud, inasmuch as he was a resident of Patiala but to seek allotment restricted to the residents of Chandigarh, he furnished a false address of Chandigarh, at the time of allotment in the year 1982.

It is asserted that in the litigation before this Court with regard to the said allotment, the petitioner had given a wrong and false address of being a resident of Chandigarh instead of Patiala. RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2019.01.17 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CROCP-4-2018 (O&M) This Court had refused to entertain the writ petition filed by the present petitioner challenging the aforesaid allotment from the Chandigarh Housing Board by Mr.Rajinder Ghai by fraud, vide order dated 23.8.2011, on the premise that the petitioner has no locus to seek recalling of the previous similar litigation decided in favour of Rajinder Ghai in CWP No.5075 of 1982, decided on 31.5.2000. The effort of the petitioner to seek a certificate from the learned Advocate General, Punjab, has also failed.

On the previous dates of hearing, in the light of the assertion made by the petitioner to substantiate the plea of contemptuous conduct of Rajinder Ghai, an opportunity was afforded to produce copies of the orders passed in SLP by Hon'ble the Supreme Court against the judgment rendered in CWP No.5075 of 1982, decided on 31.5.2000. At the time of resumed hearing today, neither the petitioner has come present nor any such order has been produced. Be that as it may, we are convinced that from the material placed on record and the allegations made, no case for invoking the criminal contempt jurisdiction against Rajinder Ghai, is made out. Dismissed.

(JASWANT SINGH) JUDGE January 11, 2019.

(ARUN KUMAR TYAGI) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2019.01.17 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document