Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 68]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Teja Singh Laut And Ors vs Pspcl And Anr on 6 April, 2018

Author: Daya Chaudhary

Bench: Daya Chaudhary

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH


                                              CWP No.7782 of 2018 (O&M)
                                              Date of decision : 06.04.2018



Teja Singh Laut and others

                                                                ......Petitioners
             Versus

P.S.P.C.L. and others
                                                                ...Respondents



CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY



Present :    Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioners.

             Ms. Anu Chatrath, Senior Advocate for respondents No.1 & 2.

             Mr. Sanjeev Manrai, Senior Advocate with
             Mr. Harpeet S. Gharuan, Advocate for respondent No.3.

                   ***

DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. (Oral)

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is an admitted position that objections were invited and a period of two months was given to file objections. Said period has not expired. Petitioners also filed their objections but without considering their objections, the work has been started. It is also the case of the petitioners that curve has been made just to give benefit to certain persons, whereas straight-line could have been there. It was specifically mentioned in the objections but no order has been passed.

1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 09-04-2018 15:16:25 ::: CWP No.7782 of 2018 -2- Mr. Sanjeev Manrai, Senior Advocate appearing for respondent No.3 submits that out of the petitioners, two petitioners namely Malkit Singh (petitioner No.7) and Baljit Singh (petitioner No.20) have already received the compensation and they have no cause of action to file the present petition.

Learned senior counsel appearing for P.S.P.L., on instructions from Er. Sukhminder Singh, Addl. S. E. (TL), P.S.P.C.L., Patiala submits that the objections of the petitioners were considered and conveyed to them orally, however, no written orders were passed.

The writ petition qua petitioners Malkit Singh (petitioner No.7) and Baljit Singh (petitioner No.20) is dismissed as infructuous as they have already received the compensation.

As per objections raised by the remaining petitioners are concerned, the respondent-authorities are directed to consider their objections/representations within a period of three days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. In case the presence of the petitioners is required, the same be given. The objections/representations be considered in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. Parties are directed to be present before the concerned authority in the office of Addl. S. E. (TL), P.S.P.C.L., Patiala on 09.04.2018 at 11:00 a.m. Respondents have undertaken not to proceed with the work till the disposal of the objections.

Disposed of.

Copy of this order be supplied to learned counsel for the parties 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 09-04-2018 15:16:26 ::: CWP No.7782 of 2018 -3- under signature of Bench Secretary of this Court.





06.04.2018                                       ( DAYA CHAUDHARY )
sunil yadav                                            JUDGE


 Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No

 Whether reportable             : Yes / No




                                 3 of 3
              ::: Downloaded on - 09-04-2018 15:16:26 :::