High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/3690/2018disposed of

M/S Shiv Lal Rattan Lal v. State Of Haryana & Others

2018-02-16Mr. Justice R.C. Kathuria (Retd.),Mr. Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu2 pages

CWP-3690-2018 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-3690-2018 Date of Decision: 16.02.2018 M/s Shiv Lal Rattan Lal ....Petitioner.

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL PRESENT: Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

The petitioner claims itself to be the old licensee of Market Committee, Safidon. The petitioner and others had earlier approached this Court by way of various writ petitions claiming themselves eligible for allotment of plots at concessional rates/reserve price on preferential basis in the New Grain Market at Safidon. Their writ petitions were disposed of vide order dated 29.03.2017 passed in CWP No.7243 of 2015 (M/s Bhole Shankar Trading Company and others v. State of Haryana and others) and other connected cases (Annexure P-10) by formulating certain questions in para 17 of the said order with a further direction to the Chief Administrator of Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board to determine those questions within a period of four months. In purported compliance of the said order, the Chief Administrator, HSAMB has passed the impugned order dated 21.8.2017 (Annexure P-11) rejecting the claim of petitioner as 'old licensee'. Gurbachan Singh 2018.02.23 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-3690-2018 -2The aggrieved petitioner is again before this Court. It is undeniable that the above-mentioned order is assailable before the State Government by way of a revision petition under the provisions of Haryana Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961. The instant writ petition is, thus, disposed of at this stage by relegating the petitioner to avail the above-stated remedy, with a direction to the State Government to make an endeavour to decide the revision petition within a period of three months from the date of its filing. The petitioner shall be at liberty to seek ad interim stay from the Revisional Authority and such an application shall be decided within two weeks from the date of its filing.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE February 16, 2018 (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Gurbachan Singh 2018.02.23 13:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document