CWP No. 16296 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Case No: CWP No. 16296 of 2008 Date of Decision: March 17, 2010 Shaheed Kartar Singh Sarabha, Ayurvedic Medical College and Hospital .....PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab & others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present: Ms. Sonia G.Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. P.C. Goel, Addl. A.G. Punjab Mr. Nirdosh Dhiyal , Advocate for respondent No.4. Mr. M.L. Saggar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. G.P. Vashisth, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 5 to 10. ***** PERMOD KOHLI, J.(ORAL) The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 08.09.2008 (Annexure P- 10) whereby NOC granted in favour of Shaheed Kartar Singh Sarabha Educational Society (Regd.), Raikot, District Ludhiana vide letter dated 20.07.1998 has been withdrawn. Apart from the other grounds the main contention raised is that the impugned order has been passed without hearing the petitioner. Mr. Saggar, learned counsel on behalf of respondent Nos. 5 to 10 submits that the no NOC was granted to petitioner. According to him the College is being run by a different Society. Be that as it may, the principal question is whether the impugned order is passed in accordance with law. Since no opportunity was granted to anyone including the petitioner, who claim to be the beneficiary of NOC, it could be conveniently said that the order has been passed without affording any opportunity of being heard and in violation of principles of CWP No. 16296 of 2008 -2- natural justice. The impugned order (Annexure P-10) is thus set aside on this ground alone. The matter is remitted back to the Government. The competent authority shall pass a fresh order after affording opportunity to the petitioner as also to respondent Nos. 5 to 10. The parties shall have liberty to produce any documentary or other evidence before the competent authority in support of their respective contentions. After hearing the parties and considering the material/evidence as may be produced by the petitioner or the private respondents referred to hereinabove, the competent authority shall pass a fresh speaking order within a period of two months. March 17, 2010 (PERMOD KOHLI) naresh.k JUDGE