Dinesh Yadav v. State Of Haryana And Othrs

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.: 160 Civil Writ Petition No.13469 of 2025 Date of Decision: May 12, 2025 Dinesh Yadav ..... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Haryana & others ..... RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN PRESENT: - Mr. Saurav Bhatia, Advocate, (through VC) with Mr. Manik Moudil, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Bansal, DAG Haryana.

Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate, with Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Ms. Sharvi Dadhwal and Ms. Ashna Singh, Advocates, for the respondents-GMDA.

SUDHIR SINGH, J (Oral) This petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the official respondents to take appropriate action including removal/demolition of the illegal/unauthorised construction by respondent No.5 in a time bound manner. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aggrieved from the inaction of the respondents, the petitioner has already served a complaint/representation dated 11.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) upon respondent No.4, but no action has been taken thereon till date. He further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if the said respondent is directed to deal with his concerns/grievances and pass appropriate order on the said representation. 3.

Served with the advance copy of the petition, Mr. Gaurav Bansal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate, with Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Ms. Sharvi Dadhwal and Ms. Ashna Singh, Advocates, AVIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order.

CWP No.13469 of 2025 [2] for the respondents-GMDA is present in Court and submit that the said representation shall be considered and looked into by the competent authority (respondent No.4), in accordance with law.

4.

Without commenting on merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 (competent authority), to look into the complaint/representation dated 11.03.2025 (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner and take an appropriate action thereon, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy/production of this order.

5.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Sudhir Singh) Judge (Alok Jain) Judge May 12, 2025 avin Whether Speaking/ Reasoned:

Yes/ No Whether Reportable:

Yes/ No AVIN KUMAR 2025.05.16 09:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order.