IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17263 of 2009 Date of decision: 16th November, 2009 Vikramjit Singh … Petitioner Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rohit Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Issue notice of motion. On the asking of Court, Mr.Anupam Gupta, Senior Standing Counsel for Union Territory, Chandigarh accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Copy of the petition has been handed over to him. In the present case, one of the grievance of the petitioner is that he has been served with enforcement notice (Annexure P-1) and has been called upon to remove the advertisement/sky signs within ten days. In the present case, inter alia, it has been urged that instead of giving enforcement notice, at the first instance, petitioner should have been served show cause notice, so that he was able to justify to the authorities that advertisement displayed by the petitioner is in consonance with the Chandigarh Administration Control Order, 1954. Mr. Anupam Gupta states that Chandigarh Administration always adhere to the principles of natural justice and grant an opportunity to any erring person to put forth his objections. Civil Writ Petition No. 17263 of 2009 In the present case, impugned orders have been passed by Assistant Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, exercising the powers of Chief Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh. Therefore, at this moment, service upon Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh may not be necessary. Enforcement notice (Annexure P-1) shall be converted as show cause notice and within one week, petitioner shall file his objections and show cause as to why the advertisement/sky signs displayed by him cannot be removed. Once the petitioner does the needful, within next seven days final order shall be passed by the authorities. Till the final decision is taken by the authorities, status quo, as it exists today, shall be maintained. With these observations, present petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE November 16, 2009 rps 2