IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc. No.630-M of 2007 Date of Decision:- 29.03.2007 Meena ....Petitioner(s) through Mrs.Sarla Chaudhary, Advocate vs. State of Haryana & anr. ....Respondent(s) through Mr.R.D.Sharma, DAG, Haryana. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** SURYA KANT, J. The petitioner, who is a life convict under Section 302 IPC, has been denied parole for house repairs on the ground that there are other family members who can carry out the necessary repairs. From the plea taken in the impugned order or in the written statement, it appears that the respondents are not disputing that the house of the petitioner requires repairs. As regard to the availability of other family members, it is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the father of the petitioner has already expired and there is none except his old mother available at home. If the above-stated plea taken by the petitioner is factually correct, it is desirable that the petitioner's case for house repair parole requires consideration. Consequently, the impugned order dated 23.11.2006 (Annexure R2/T) is hereby quashed and a direction is issued to the Director General of Prisons Haryana to get the facts reverified and thereafter pass an appropriate order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Disposed of. March 29, 2007 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE