RAJESH KUMAR v. THE APPELLATE AUTHORITYBOARD OF DIRECTORS
CWP/8146/2025 · 2025-03-24
Jagmohan Bansal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37491 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 37491 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CWP-8146-2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
132 CWP-8146-2025 Date of Decision: 24.03.2025 Rajesh Kumar
......Petitioner(s) Versus
The Appellate Authority/Board of Directors, The Haryana State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. And another
....Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: Mr. Vipin Yadav and Mr. J.S. Sohal, Advocates, for the petitioner. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents.
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1.
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent not to effect recovery during the pendency of appeal before Appellate Authority.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that petitioner has filed appeal before Appellate Authority against an order whereby his liability was determined by Adjudicating Authority. This Court has consistently held that recovery shall not be effected during the pendency of appeal. Shivani Gupta 2025.03.25 10:46
CWP-8146-2025 2
3.
Ms. Rajni Gupta, Advocate, who on advance notice is present in Court, submits that petitioner could file application before Appellate Authority which would have stayed the recovery.
4.
On being confronted with order dated 30.01.2025 passed in CWP- 2461-2025 (Annexure P-7), she expressed her inability to controvert the applicability of said order to instant petition.
5.
In the wake of statement of both sides, the present petition stands
disposed of in terms of aforesaid order. 24.03.2025
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) shivani
JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking
Yes Whether reportable
No
Shivani Gupta 2025.03.25 10:46