CWP-22689-2018 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (105) CWP-22689-2018 Date of decision:- 26.02.2026 R.K.Sahu …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Ms. Ayushi, Advocate, for Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate for respondent No.5. Mr. Satyam Tandon, Advocate (through VC) for respondent No.6 – MC. Rohtak. Mr. N.K.Malhotra, Advocate, for respondent No.9. SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed by the neighbour of respondent No.9, alleging that a private hospital is being run unauthorizedly in residential premises. 2. Counsel for the petitioner has made a reference to sanction letter dated 24.03.2014, to state that Municipal Corporation – respondent No.6 had granted sanction for construction of a residential building, but instead, respondent No.9 is running a hospital. Reference has also been made to the notices, Annexures R-3 to R-6, issued to respondent No.9, under Sections 261 and 262 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994, for demolition of the unauthorized construction. Counsel asserts that these documents show that request has been sent to the police authorities for providing police help for carrying out the demolition, but nothing has been done so far. PARDEEP NAUTIYAL 2026.02.26 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-22689-2018 -2- 3. Upon instructions from Mr. Sunny Dev, Building Inspector, Municipal Corporation, Rohtak, Mr. Satyam Tandon, counsel for respondent No.6 states that except for submitting a representation dated 02.09.2019, Annexure R/9/9, which is not an application for sanction of building plan, there is no other document available with respondent No.6 to show that respondent No.9 has sought sanction of a fresh building plan. 4. In view of above, official respondents are at liberty to take appropriate action against Sonia Dental & Child Care Hospital, respondent No.9, in accordance with law. Report be submitted before this Court within six months. 5. Writ petition is disposed of. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE 26.02.2026 Pardeep Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PARDEEP NAUTIYAL 2026.02.26 18:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment