Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 83061 (PNJ)

MUKESH KHOSLA v. THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS AND OTHERS

CWP/21508/2025 · 2025-09-24

Harkesh Manuja

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

184 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH MUKESH KHOSLA THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ROAD HIGHWAYS AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Athar Ahmed, D HARKESH MANUJA By way of present Constitution of India nature of mandamus directing submitted by the petitioner including representation dated 04.12.2024 (Annexure P-8). 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that instead of pressing the present petition on merits, his client would be satisfied in case direction is issued to the respondents to representations speaking order expeditiously. 3. Prayer seems to be justified. 4. Mr. Athar Ahmed, D respondents and raises no objection to the innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. may appear on 01.10.2025 at 11:00 am in the office who shall hear the petitioner and decide his claim. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: MUKESH KHOSLA Versus THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT HIGHWAYS AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present petition filed Constitution of India, prayer has been made for issuance of nature of mandamus directing respondent submitted by the petitioner including representation dated 04.12.2024 8). At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that instead of pressing the present petition on merits, his client would be satisfied in case direction is issued to the respondents to s moved at the instance of petitioner by passing a speaking order expeditiously. Prayer seems to be justified. Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab respondents and raises no objection to the innocuous prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner may appear on 01.10.2025 at 11:00 am in the office who shall hear the petitioner and decide his claim. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21508-2025 Date of Decision: September 24, 2025 ........Petitioner TRANSPORT AND ........Respondent HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. filed under Article 226 of the prayer has been made for issuance of writ in the respondents to decide representations submitted by the petitioner including representation dated 04.12.2024 At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that instead of pressing the present petition on merits, his client would be satisfied in case direction is issued to the respondents to decide the nce of petitioner by passing a AG, Punjab appears on behalf of respondents and raises no objection to the innocuous prayer made on ate counsel submits that the petitioner may appear on 01.10.2025 at 11:00 am in the office of respondent No.5 who shall hear the petitioner and decide his claim. 2025 September 24, 2025 Petitioner of the writ in the decide representations submitted by the petitioner including representation dated 04.12.2024 At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that instead of pressing the present petition on merits, his client would be decide the nce of petitioner by passing a appears on behalf of respondents and raises no objection to the innocuous prayer made on ate counsel submits that the petitioner respondent No.5 TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.27 00:31 I agree to specified portions of this document CWP-21508-2025 -2- 5. In view of the agreed stand taken by both sides, but without going into the merits of the controversy, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.5-Land Acquisition Collector, Public Works Department (B&R), Jalandhar to look into the representations and decide the same by passing a reasoned order within a period of 4 weeks and forward a copy thereof to the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 6. The aforesaid direction shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the averments made in the representation. 24.09.2025 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.27 00:31 I agree to specified portions of this document