Vinod Jindal And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH (149) Date of Decision:-22.09.2025 Vinod Jindal and Others ......Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and Others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER **** Present :

Mr. Amit Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Harpreet Singh, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.3-Municipal Council, Zirakpur. **** HARSH BUNGER, J. (Oral) The present Civil Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to approve the MAP for construction of a Multi-Storey Building on the plot measuring 816 square yards, situated at Ambala-Chandigarh Highway, Zirakpur, District S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali), Punjab.

2.

Briefly stated, the petitioners claim to be the owner in possession of land measuring 1 kanal 7 marlas (as detailed in para 3 of the writ petition).

-1-

2.1 It appears that the petitioners applied for approval of the building plan for construction of a multi-storey building on the aforesaid land, which was forwarded to the Chief Town Planner vide letter dated 25.02.2011. At the time of submission of the said application, the petitioners had deposited an amount of ₹3,85,055/- by way of demand draft dated 23.10.2010. However, the building plan submitted by the petitioners was rejected by the Chief Town Planner vide letter dated 18.04.2011 (Annexure P-7) on technical grounds.

2.2 The petitioners further claim that necessary permissions/no objection certificates were obtained from the concerned authorities, but despite the same, approval of the building plan has not been granted till date. 3.

Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate, appears on behalf of respondent No.3 - Municipal Council, Zirakpur and files power of attorney, which is taken on record. He submits that the application of the petitioners for approval of building plan, submitted in the year 2011, was duly considered and rejected on technical grounds as per the norms which were prevalent at the relevant time. Subsequently, the norms have been amended and even the no objection certificates earlier obtained by the petitioners have lapsed and in those circumstances, the petitioners will have to apply afresh for seeking approval of building plans along with other requisite sanctions/permissions. He further submits that so far as the amount of ₹3,85,055/- already deposited by the petitioners is concerned, the same would be adjusted towards the fee which may be now leviable, subject to the petitioners paying any balance amount, if any. -2-

4.

Keeping in view of the statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.3, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh application seeking approval of building plans duly supported by other necessary documents/permissions/approvals. He further prays that time-bound directions may be issued for consideration of such application.

5.

Keeping in view the aforesaid stand taken by counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. It goes without saying that in case the petitioner applies afresh for approval of the building plan supported by other requisite documents/permissions/approvals/ sanctions etc., the same shall be considered by the Municipal Council/competent authority within a period of eight weeks from the date of submission of such application.

6.

All pending application(s), if any, stand closed accordingly. 22.09.2025 (HARSH BUNGER) Shubham JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No -3-