IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 610 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 26, 2009 Ramphul …Appellant Versus The Financial Commissioner, Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. M.L. Saini, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. R.D. Sharma, DAG, Haryana, for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Mr. Rajesh Arora, Advocate, for respondent No. 5. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 1.4.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing C.W.P. No. 1209 of 2008 filed by the petitioner-appellant. The primary grievance of the petitioner-appellant before the learned Single Judge as also before this Court is that Naksha Bay has been approved without deciding his objections. A perusal of the record shows that on 13.12.2005 objections with LPA No. 610 of 2009 (O&M) regard to Naksha Bay were raised and those objections were decided on 28.12.2005. A certified copy of the zimni orders passed by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Pataudi, District Gurgaon, during 26.10.2005 to 18.1.2006 is Mark ‘A’. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having seen the record we are satisfied that the issue raised by the petitioner-appellant is without any merit and the objections raised by him against Naksha Bay were duly examined and disposed of. There is, thus no merit in the instant appeal. Dismissed. In view of the fact that the appeal has been dismissed on merit, no orders are required to be passed on the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal as well as application for stay which have been filed along with the appeal. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (JASWANT SINGH) November 26, 2009 JUDGE Pkapoor 2