Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 36959 (PNJ)

HOTEL MOHAN INTERNATIONAL, ALBERT ROAD, AMRITSAR THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR KAPIL GALHOTRA v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CWP/27521/2026 · 2026-08-27

Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, Pravindra Singh Chauhan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP-27521-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 125 CWP-27521-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.08.2026 Hotel Mohan International, Albert Road, Amritsar .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVINDRA SINGH CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Lalit Chander Sharma, Advocate for Mr. B.D.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shruti, AAG, Punjab for respondents No.1 and 5. Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate and Ms. Kulwinder Kaur, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4. **** JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J.(Oral) 1. The present Civil Writ Petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents No. 1 to 5 to take action on the representation dated 12.05.2026 (Annexure P-3) submitted by the petitioner for removing the illegal construction being raised on the plot by respondents No.6 and 7. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had given a representation dated 12.05.2026 (Annexure P-3) to the Chairman, Improvement Trust, Amritsar-respondent No.2 but the same has not been considered and decided till date. He further submitted that at this stage, the petitioner will be satisfied in case the aforesaid representation 12.05.2026 (Annexure P-3) is considered and decided by respondent No.2 in RAJEEV PUROHIT 2026.08.31 17:46 I am approving this document CWP-27521-2026 2 accordance with law and in a time bound manner. 3. Notice of motion. 4. On the asking of the Court, Ms. Shruti, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 5-State. Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.2, 3 and 4. Learned counsel for Improvement Trust submitted that in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, she has no objection in case a time bound direction is issued in this regard. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, without calling for a reply from the respondents and without expressing anything on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2-Chairman, Improvement Trust/competent authority to consider and decide the representation dated 12.05.2026 (Annexure P-3) strictly in accordance with law and within a period of one month from today. (JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) JUDGE 27.08.2026 (PRAVINDRA SINGH CHAUHAN) Rajeev (rvs) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No RAJEEV PUROHIT 2026.08.31 17:46 I am approving this document