Rajiv Sabharwal vs Managing Director, Haryana Tourism ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 16439 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rajiv Sabharwal vs Managing Director, Haryana Tourism ... on 6 September, 2024

Author: Deepak Sibal

Bench: Deepak Sibal

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117176-DB




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

(Sr. No. 109)                                      LPA No.2158 of 2024
                                                   Date of decision: 06.09.2024

Rajiv Sabharwal
                                                                     ..... Appellant
                Versus

Managing Director, Haryana Tourism Cooperation Ltd.

                                                                   ..... Respondent


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA

Present :       Mr. Parveen Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.
                       ***

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

(1) The present intra court appeal is directed against judgment dated

29.11.2023 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the

appellant's writ petition.

(2) After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and examining the

record as also going through the impugned judgment, we find that the

appellant's writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has

been dismissed on the ground that the same involved adjudication of disputed

facts as what has been challenged by the appellant was the recovery sought to

be made from him on account of alleged loss caused by him to the respondent -

Haryana Tourism Corporation Ltd., which he disputed.

(3) The recovery impugned by the appellant is based on an inquiry

report by the Audit Department. The appellant disputes the findings thereof.

Before a decision can be arrived at in the favour of either party delving deep in

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:117176-DB

facts would be required which this Court should refrain in the exercise of its

writ jurisdiction.

(4) In the light of the above, we are of the view that the learned

Single Judge committed no error denying the relief to the appellant in the

exercise of this Court's writ jurisdiction.

(5)            Dismissed.

(6)            It is, however, clarified that in the alternate remedy, if any, that

the appellant may choose, he would be at liberty to raise all issues available to

him, in law.

                                                        (DEEPAK SIBAL)
                                                            JUDGE


06.09.2024                                       ( DEEPAK MANCHANDA)
sunil yadav                                              JUDGE

       Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
       Whether reportable        : Yes / No




                                  2 of 2