Rajesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 11894 P&H

LPA-382-2022 (O&M)
                                                                                1

110

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH

                                               LPA-382-2022 (O&M)
                                               Date of decision : 21.09.2022
RAJESH KUMAR
                                                               ..... APPELLANT

                                        VS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
                                                           ..... RESPONDENTS

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
        HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK JAIN

Present :-   Mr. Munish Behl, Advocate for the appellant.

             Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana
             For respondents No.1 to 5.

                    ***

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral)

Challenge in this appeal to the order/judgment passed by learned Single

Judge dated 19.04.2022, whereby the writ petitions preferred by the appellant

have been dismissed and the allegations made therein for changing the route

with an intend to help certain influential person have been answered against

him. It has also come in the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge

based upon the statutory rules and judgments passed by the Court, as affirmed

by the Supreme Court that the affected person has no right to be heard and his

entitlement is limited to the extent of compensation.

Learned counsel for the appellant has sought time to place on record the

non-feasibility report to substantiate his assertion that the changes, which have

been brought about which led to the erection of poles in his land was

unjustified and with an intention to help out certain people. On the said non-

feasibility report, the counsel has very fairly stated that it is not available on

1 of 2

LPA-382-2022 (O&M)

the record, rather as per the reports available, the shortest route has been

adopted leading to the respondents having benefited by the said process. We,

therefore, do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned Single

Judge, which would entail interference by us in the present appeal.

The appeal, therefore, stands dismissed.

In view of disposal of the main case, no orders are required to be passed

in the remaining civil misc. applications and the same also stand disposed of.

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE

(ALOK JAIN) JUDGE

21.09.2022 manju

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable Yes/No

2 of 2