IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 116 HARI KRISHAN TANEJA AND ANOTHER STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present: Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shrey Sachdeva, Advocate Ms. Shruti Singla, Advocate and Ms.Radhika, Advocate for the Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate for respondent No.2 ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) Learned senior counsel for the the petitioners had purchased demolished the old house proposed site plan had been sanctioned but the issued an impugned non-construction fine of Rs.53,14,875/ plots. He submits that the break up of the amount and whether the would also be liable to pay for the period in which the construction had carried out by the previous owner has not been set out letter (Annexure P 2. Issue notice to the respondents. 3. At the asking of the Court, Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1. Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-24433-2025 DATE OF DECISION: 22.08.2025 HARI KRISHAN TANEJA AND ANOTHER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shrey Sachdeva, Advocate Ms. Shruti Singla, Advocate and Ms.Radhika, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate for respondent No.2 ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) Learned senior counsel for the petitioners had purchased two adjoining plots in the year 2021. demolished the old house as they wanted to raise new construction. The proposed site plan had been sanctioned but the n impugned demand letter dated 01.02.2024 (Annexure P construction fine of Rs.53,14,875/- from the year 20 plots. He submits that the break up of the amount and whether the be liable to pay for the period in which the construction had carried out by the previous owner has not been set out letter (Annexure P-2). Issue notice to the respondents. At the asking of the Court, Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1. Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2025 DATE OF DECISION: 22.08.2025 … Petitioner (s) ... Respondent(s) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate with petitioners. Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab. Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate for respondent No.2 to 4. petitioners, inter alia, submits that plots in the year 2021. They had wanted to raise new construction. The proposed site plan had been sanctioned but the respondents have erroneously dated 01.02.2024 (Annexure P-29) imposing from the year 2005-2023 for both the plots. He submits that the break up of the amount and whether the petitioners be liable to pay for the period in which the construction had not been carried out by the previous owner has not been set out in the impugned demand At the asking of the Court, Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1. Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate , submits that had wanted to raise new construction. The have erroneously ing for both the petitioners been in the impugned demand At the asking of the Court, Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1. Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.08.27 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-24433-2025 -2- accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 to 4 and submits that the petitioners may furnish representation to respondent No.2 and a speaking order would be passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to them. 4. Heard. 5. The petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to prefer a representation to respondent No.2 within a period of two weeks and respondent No.2 would pass a speaking order within a period of one month thereafter after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 22.08.2025 SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.08.27 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document