High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Avtar Singh vs The Punjab State Warehousing … on 28 January, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Avtar Singh vs The Punjab State Warehousing … on 28 January, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
              CHANDIGARH


                                         CWP No. 1284 of 2009
                                         Date of Decision: 28.1.2009.

Avtar Singh                                               ---Petitioner

                          Vs.


The Punjab State Warehousing Corp. and another            ---Respondents


CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI.


Present:-     Mr. Jagdeep Bains, Advocate for the petitioner.

              ***

PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL)

Notice of motion.

Mr. A.D.S. Sukhija, Advocate, who is present in the Court, has

accepted notice on behalf of the respondents.

The main grievance of the petitioner is that two appeals are

pending before the Appellate Authority since 2006 and 2007 respectively

and the same have not been decided, nor the application for grant of stay has

been considered till date. The petitioner has been fastened with the liability

vide order dated 22.8.2006 (Annexure P-4) and 18.6.2007 (Annexure P-6).

These orders have been made the subject matter of the aforesaid two

appeals. The petitioner claims to have made an application for interim stay

also but the Appellate Authority neither passed any order on the interim

application nor in the main appeal.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to challenge

the recovery proceedings and for issue of a writ in the nature of Mandamus

for a direction to the authority to consider the interim stay and decide the
CWP No. 1284 of 2009 -2-

appeal.

In the above circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a

direction to the Appellate Authority to dispose of the appeals filed by the

petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case not later than six

months. The Appellate Authority shall consider the application for stay.

Till the time application for stay is considered, no recovery shall be effected

from the petitioner.

Petition disposed of as such.

(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE
28.1.2009
lucky