CWP-1413-2022 (1) In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh [107-4] CWP- 1413-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21 .03.2025 M/S. MINTAGE STEELS LTD. ...... PETITIONER VERSUS THE HSIIDC LIMITED AND OTHERS ......RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Amit Jhanji, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Eliza Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Pankaj Kundra, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Ankur Mittal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, Ms. Svaneel Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, Mr. P.P. Chahar, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, Mr. Saurabh Mago, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, Mr. Gaurav Bansal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana and Mr. Karan Jindal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate Ms. Saanvi Singla, Advocate Ms. Sharvi Dadhwal, Advocate for the respondents (HSIIDC). **** SURESHWAR THAKUR , J. (ORAL) 1. The learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner(s) submits that the impugned therein annexures, to which respectively Annexures P-22 and P-23, become assigned, are ridden with the vice of theirs breaching the principles of audi alteram partem. 2. The reason which the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner(s) assigns for the supra breach being made, is embodied in the factum, that prior to the makings of the impugned orders, thus neither any notice(s) became served upon the petitioner(s), nor any opportunity to participate in the proceedings, which ultimately resulted in the passing of the impugned annexures, but was assigned to the petitioner(s). ANJAL GUPTA 2025.03.25 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-1413-2022 (2) 3. The learned Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, was also not able to place on record any material suggestive, that the said submissions made before this Court by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner(s), rather are inapt. 4. In the wake of the above, impugned orders (Annexures P-22 and P-23) are quashed and set aside, and, only if the allotment of the subject plot(s) is required to be cancelled, thereupons, notice may be considered to be issued upon the petitioner(s), and, subsequently the petitioner(s) shall be permitted to participate in the detailed hearings to be made in pursuance to the said issued notice. Morover, complete adherence shall be made to the principles of natural justice. 5. Moreover, till the making of any re-decision, if it is required to be made, thereupto the possession of the present petitioner over the subject plot(s), shall not be disturbed. 6. The present writ petition is disposed of accordingly, alongwith all pending application(s), if any. (SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE (VIKAS SURI) JUDGE 21.03.2025 Anjal Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No ANJAL GUPTA 2025.03.25 09:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document