High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

Krishan Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Others on 3 November, 2008

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Krishan Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Others on 3 November, 2008
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH.

                                                 C.W.P. No. 18758 of 2008
                                        DATE OF DECISION : 03.11.2008

Krishan Kumar
                                                           .... PETITIONER

                                  Versus

State of Punjab and others

                                                       ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH


Present:    Mr. S.K. Arora, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.

                  ***

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )

The petitioner, who owns two shops in Krishan Chowk, old

Grain Market, Guruharsahai, District Ferozepur, has filed this petition under

Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the resolution

No.44 dated 16.10.2008 (Annexure P-2), passed by the Municipal Council,

Guruharsahai (respondent No.4 herein), allowing its tenants to extend their

rented shops by 10 feet.

The grouse of the petitioner is that if the tenants of the

Municipal Council are permitted to raise construction by expanding their

shops by 10 feet, then face of the shops of the petitioner would be covered

and would adversely affect his business. To show the factual position, the

petitioner has annexed the site plan Annexure P-1. In the site plan,
CWP No. 18758 of 2008 -2-

consciously and deliberately, the petitioner has not disclosed the dimensions

of the shops of the Municipal Council, which are under the tenancy of

different persons. Even otherwise, the Municipal Council, Guruharsahai is

owner of the shops and the space in front of the shops, expansion of which

has been allowed. We are further of the opinion that even if construction is

raised in front of the rented shops of the Municipal Council, it is not going

to cover the face of the shops of the petitioner. In these facts and

circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this petition at all.

Dismissed.



                                         ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
                                                 JUDGE


November 03, 2008                           ( JASWANT SINGH )
ndj                                               JUDGE