Manjit Manocha v. Pec University Of Technology & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH [1] Letters Patent Appeal No.245 of 2015 (O&M) Date of decision : March 03, 2015.

Manjit Manocha .....Appellant versus PEC University of Technology and others .....Respondents [2] Letters Patent Appeal No.2135 of 2014 (O&M) Manjit Manocha .....Appellant versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI.

Present:Mr.Rajan Bansal, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr.R.S.Bains, Advocate, for the respondents.

-.-

1. Whether Reporters of 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of LPA Nos.245 of 2015 and 2135 of 2014 which are preferred against the orders dated 21.11.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in two different writ petitions.

The controversy pertains to possessory rights over a booth in the PEC University of Technology, Chandigarh, which was initially given to Milkfed to sell milk products through its agents. It appears that the original agent sold his business rights in favour of the appellant whose licence was

LPA Nos.245 of 2015 & 2135 of 2014 (O&M) [2] cancelled by the PEC authorities allegedly for violation of terms and conditions of permissible use. The learned Single Judge has declined to interfere with those orders giving rise to these two appeals.

Mr.R.S.Bains, learned counsel for the respondentUniversity informs that the appellant has put up a request before the PEC authorities for allotment of a shop in the PEC Shopping Complex and his request is under active consideration of the Competent Authority. According to him, there is every likelihood that a shop shall be allotted to the appellant.

In view of the above-mentioned development and having regard to the limited scope of interference in the Appellate jurisdiction, we dispose of these appeals without interfering with the orders of the learned Single Judge, with liberty to the appellant to inspire confidence and persuade the authorities for settlement of the user charges/ rental etc. of the new premises, if allotted to him.

The appeals stand disposed of accordingly.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE March 03, 2015 [NARESH KUMAR SANGHI] Mohinder JUDGE

LPA Nos.245 of 2015 & 2135 of 2014 (O&M) [3] CM No.467 of 2015 in LPA No.245 of 2015 - - - Manjit Manocha versus PEC University of Technology and others ---- Present : Mr.Rajan Bansal, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr.R.S.Bains, Advocate, for the respondent-University.

* * * For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions and 47 days' delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

CM stands disposed of.

(SURYA KANT) JUDGE March 03, 2015 (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) Mohinder JUDGE