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 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Som Nath And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 18 March, 2021

Author: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

Bench: Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

CWP No. 6245 of 2021

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                              CHANDIGARH


                                             CWP No. 6245 of 2021
                                             Date of Decision: 18.03.2021

Som Nath and others

                                                              ....Petitioner(s)

                                    Versus

State of Haryana and others

                                                            .....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI

Present :   Mr. Vineet Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioners.


Through Video Conferencing

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to decide the revision petition i.e. ROR No. 415 of 2015 (Annexure P-3).

The learned counsel has submitted that the petitioners had filed a petition under Section 13A of the Punjab Village Common Lands Act, 1961, which was dismissed by the learned Collector and on appeal the same was also dismissed by the learned Commissioner, Panchkula vide Annexure P-2. Thereafter, ROR was filed in the year 2015, which is still pending with the learned Financial Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh. He further submitted that the Court of the learned Financial Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh is fully functional and he is making only a limited prayer with regard to seeking a direction to the learned Financial 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2021 19:43:44 ::: CWP No. 6245 of 2021 Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh to decide the ROR in a time bound manner and in accordance with law.

Notice of motion to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 only.

Mr. Deepak Manchanda, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the aforesaid respondents and states that he has no objection in case appropriate directions are issued for deciding the aforesaid ROR, in accordance with law.

In view of the above, since ROR is stated to be pending since 2015, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the aforeaid ROR No. 415 of 2015 (Annexure P-3) pending before his Court as expeditiously as possible and preferrably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, in accordance with law and after affording opportunity of hearing to all the parties.

It is made clear that in this order nothing is reflected on the merits of the case.





                                            (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
18.03.2021                                          JUDGE
rakesh


             Whether speaking                         :       Yes/No
             Whether reportable                       :       Yes/No




                                   2 of 2
                ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2021 19:43:44 :::