Sandeep Jasuja & ANR v. Advisor To The Administrator & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No.25019 of 2016 Date of Decision: December 03, 2016 Sandeep Jasuja and another ....Petitioners versus Advisor to the Administrator, UT, Chandigarh and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SNEH PRASHAR *****

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Jasuja, Advocate (Petitioner No.1 in person) and for petitioner No.2.

***** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

(Oral) 1.

The prayer made in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to convert the property of the petitioners from SCF to SCO under the policy of conversion as they have complied with all the formalities for getting their property converted from SCF to SCO.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition at this stage. However, a prayer was made that the permission be granted to the petitioners to approach respondent No.4 by filing a detailed and comprehensive representation along with the relevant supporting material in respect of the claim made in this writ petition. However, a direction be issued to the said respondent to decide the same in a

Civil Writ Petition No.25019 of 2016 -2- ------ time bound manner after affording an opportunity of hearing to them in accordance with law.

3.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation collectively along with the relevant supporting material to substantiate their claim as made in the present writ petition before respondent No.4 within fortnight from today. However, It is directed that in the event of representation being filed by the petitioners, the same shall be decided by respondent No.4 in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to them within a period of next three months.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (SNEH PRASHAR) December 03, 2016 JUDGE sonia gugnani Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No