Thursday, Oct 23, 2014

Plea asks for removing barricades in front of Punjab CM house, High Court gives UT a month’s time

The order reads that “however, the petitioner having made a representation, certainly, the respondents are required to deal with the same and communicate the decision whether it is possible to open the road now or not. The order reads that “however, the petitioner having made a representation, certainly, the respondents are required to deal with the same and communicate the decision whether it is possible to open the road now or not.
Express News Service | Chandigarh | Posted: March 5, 2014 3:06 am

Acting on a petition seeking directions to the Chandigarh Administration for removing the barricades on the road in front of the Punjab Chief Minister’s house, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday told the administration to take a final call on the issue within a month.

The directions were passed by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Arun Palli on a petition filed by advocate Ranjan Lakhanpal.

Arguing in person, Lakhanpal contended that the barricades put on the lake road from Nayagaon side were causing inconvenience to the general public, especially those living in the vicinity. These were earlier set up on account of a security threat to the Chief Minister. But the ground reality was different now and the road was required to be opened, the petitioner said.

Lakhanpal also argued that a representation, dated February 6, was forwarded to the authorities on the issue but to no avail. Taking note of the petition, the bench remarked: “We are of the view that the matter is of such a nature that the authorities concerned should take a call and they are really not justiciable.”

The order reads that “however, the petitioner having made a representation, certainly, the respondents are required to deal with the same and communicate the decision whether it is possible to open the road now or not. We consider it appropriate to issue a direction to the respondents to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner dated February 6 within a period of one month from the receipt of the order and communicate the same to the petitioner, making it clear that there is no further PIL to be entertained on this account”.

comments powered by Disqus
Featured ad: Discount Shopping
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,294 other followers