Monu Kumar v. M/S Samar Brothers & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Letters Patent Appeal No.176 of 2015 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 04.02.2015 Monu Kumar .....Appellant versus M/s Samar Brothers and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. C.M. Munjal, Advocate for the appellant Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Wadhawan, Advocate for respondent No.1 ..

S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral):

Caveat Application:

Learned counsel for the caveator/respondent No.1 has entered appearance.

Caveat stands discharged.

LPA-176-2015:

The learned Judge has allowed the first respondent's petition challenging an order passed by respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, Fazilka, on the basis of an order passed by respondent No.4-Municipal Council, Abohar, withdrawing a licence granted for exhibiting films in a video parlour on the ground that the order was passed without affording the respondent No.1 an opportunity of being heard or meeting the allegations on the basis whereof the impugned action was taken. PARKASH CHAND 2015.02.06 12:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

LPA-176-2015 - 2 - 2.

Admittedly, respondent No.1 was not afforded a hearing or any opportunity to meet the allegations on the basis of which the orders impugned in the writ petition were passed. The order impugned in this appeal, therefore, warrants no interference whatsoever.

3.

The appellant, who claimes to be a public-spirited citizen has, in any event, filed a writ petition challenging the permissions/certificates granted in favour of respondent No.1 i.e. CWP No.17372 of 2014, which is pending before the learned single Judge. The appellant can always raise the contentions on merits in that writ petition.

4.

The learned single Judge has, however, clarified that the order impugned in this appeal will not prevent the Municipal Council, Abohar as well as the authorities concerned from proceeding in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner i.e. respondent No.1 to the appeal. 5.

The appellant claims a right to be heard by the authorities concerned. The appellant is always at liberty to apply to the authorities concerned to be heard. The authorities concerned shall decide the application.

6.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

(S.J. VAZIFDAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE 04.02.2015 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) parkash* JUDGE PARKASH CHAND 2015.02.06 12:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document