M/S H M AGRO FOODS DISTT HARIDWAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
WPMS/1575/2025 · 2025-06-10
Ravindra Maithani
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7293 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7293 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS D/13
WPMS No.1575 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. B.S. Bhandari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Cousnel for the State/respondent no.1. Mr. Davesh Bishnoi, Advocate for respondent no.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was allotted a slaughter house by the respondent no.2/the Nagar Palika Parishad Manglour, but before expiry of the period, for which, it was allotted, it has been terminated. Now, the petitioner is entitled to claim the damages as per the agreement and rectified deed. Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the permission to run the slaughter house has been terminated before stipulated period. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for compensation. The petitioner has made a representation to the respondent no.2, which has yet not been decided.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission that he may be given liberty to give a fresh representation to the respondent no.2/the Nagar Palika Parishad Manglour, with the directions to the respondent no.2/the Nagar Palika Parishad Manglour to take a decision on it within a stipulated time.
Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 would submit that the respondent
no.2/the Nagar Palika Parishad Manglour would take a decision on the representation that may be filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks. The Court takes on record the statement given by learned counsel for the respondent no.2/the Nagar Palika Parishad Manglour. The petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondent no.2/the Nagar Palika Parishad Manglour within a period of one week with further direction to the respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner by a speaking
order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of next six weeks.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 10.06.2025 Sanjay