Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33755 (PNJ)

MS RS BUILDERS v. THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CWP/16982/2026 · 2026-07-23

Tribhuvan Dahiya

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Serial No.113 CWP-16982-2026 Decided on:23.07.2026 M/s R. S. Builders . . . Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA PRESENT: Mr. R. K. Girdhar, Advocate, Mr. Chirag Girdhar, Advocate and Mr. Amanveer Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Satjot Singh Chahal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Ms. Shreya Bublani, Advocate for respondents no.3 and 4. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.(ORAL) The petition has been filed inter alia seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) and balance security amount of `23,45,263 along with interest, for the construction of Basera Project (Housing)-Block-E at Rajpura executed by the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at this stage the petitioner will be satisfied in case respondent no.4 is directed to decide its pending legal notice, dated 01.03.2024, Annexure P-4, in a specified period. 3. Learned counsel for the Municipal Council, on instructions, submits that the pending legal notice, dated 01.03.2024, will be decided by the fourth respondent/Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Rajpura, District MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.27 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-16982-2026 -2- Patiala, by passing a speaking order in accordance with law within two months and the due amount as found admissible will be released to the petitioner within four weeks thereafter. 4. In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof. 5. Ordered accordingly. 6. In case the decision is not taken on the pending legal notice and the due amount is not paid within the stipulated periods, the officer concerned shall pay costs of `50,000 to the petitioner. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) 23.07.2026 JUDGE Mehak Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.27 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment