Biru Ram v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 24602 of 2018 Decided on : 26.09.2018 Biru Ram . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Vishal Ranjan, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

**** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) The petitioner has approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus, for directing the respondents to receive the lease money as well as property tax from the petitioner in respect of land measuring 4 Kanals, situated in Hadbast No.88, Khasra No.9/12, Tehsil Naraingarh, leased out to petitioner by the Municipal Council, Naraingarh in the year 1989, as the official respondents are not receiving the same and not issuing any receipt against the payment of lease money and to decide the claim of the petitioner raised vide legal notice/representations (appended as Annexures P-3, P-4 & P-5, respectively). It has also been prayed that respondents No.2 to 5 be restrained from dispossessing the petitioner from the land in dispute by way of illegal means.

2.

After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition at this stage. He, however, prayed that liberty be granted to the petitioner to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before respondent No.3 by incorporating the grievance as raised in the present writ petition and direction be issued to respondent No.3 to decide the representation expeditiously in a time JAWALA RAM 2018.09.27 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 24602 of 2018 - 2 - bound manner in accordance with law.

3.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, we dispose of the present petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to file a detailed and comprehensive representation raising all the pleas as raised in the present writ petition, before respondent No.3 within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is, however, clarified that in case such a representation is filed, the same shall be decided by respondent No.3, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and by passing a speaking order expeditiously, in accordance with law.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE September 26, 2018 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2018.09.27 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh