High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/14469/2015dismissed

Ravi Dutt Badyal v. State Of Punjab & ORS

2015-09-10Mr. Justice S.C. Datta2 pages

-1CWP-14469-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-14469-2015 Date of Decision: 10.09.2015 Ravi Dutt Badyal ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab and others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH

1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not ?.

3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

Present:

Mr. Ravi Dutt Badyal, Advocate, petitioner in person.

Mr. Suresh Singla, Addl. A. G. Punjab.

Mr. Sanjeev Soni, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

Mr. T.S.Khaira, Advocate, for respondent No.5.

Paramjeet Singh, J. (Oral) Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to respondent No.4 to treat the House Plan in respect of plot No.395 measuring 250 sq. yds., located in Sector 123, Sunny Enclave, Kharar, Mohali, owned by the petitioner, as "deemed sanction" under the provisions of Section 193 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 and for issuance of direction to the respondents to provide all civil amenities like sewerage, water supply, PARVEEN KUMAR 2015.09.15 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

-2CWP-14469-2015 electricity roads etc. to the plot of the petitioner within the specific time bound manner.

In compliance of order dated 31.08.2015, Sh. Sanjeev Kumar, Regional Deputy Director, Local Government, Patiala has filed status report on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3, Sh. Sukhjinder Singh Sidhu, Exective Officer, Municipal Council, Kharar has filed short reply on behalf of respondent No.4 and Sh. Jarnail Singh Bajwa, Managing Director of Bajwa Developers Ltd. has filed affidavit on behalf of respondent No.5 in Court today which are taken on record. In view of status report/short reply/affidavit filed on behalf of respondents respectively, the grievance of the petitioner appears to have been redressed, so the instant petition has become infructuous. Dismissed as infructuous.

However, if the petitioner still feels aggrieved, he will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

10.09.2015 (Paramjeet Singh) parveen kumar Judge PARVEEN KUMAR 2015.09.15 11:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document