111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-9816-2025 Date of decision: 22.07.2026 SANJAY CHAWLA AND OTHERS ...PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present: Mr. Alok Jagga, Advocate and Mr. Harkirat Singh Jagdev, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. This civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India for quashing of letter dated 03.03.2022 (Annexure P-7), letter dated 25.08.2023 (Annexure P-13), decision dated 28.08.2023 (Annexure P-15) and subsequent notice dated 27.01.2025 (Annexure P-17) and also for quashing of sealing notice (Annexure P-19) issued by respondent under Section 3 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents-State has submitted that the impugned orders are appealable, whereas in para 25 of the petition, it has been stated that no alternate remedy of appeal or revision is there. Para 25 of the writ petition which has been highlighted by learned counsel for respondents- State is reproduced hereinbelow:- MANISHA 2026.07.24 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-9816-2025 2 “25. That the petitioners do not have any other alternative remedy of appeal or revision in law, much less any equally efficacious one in any other Court, or authority.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in view of the same, he be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to seek alternative remedy in accordance with law. 4. In view of the above, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE (SUBHAS MEHLA) July 22, 2026 JUDGE Manisha (i) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No (ii) Whether reportable Yes/No MANISHA 2026.07.24 11:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document