IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 2267 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 12, 2011 Balmukand Sharma …Appellant Versus State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present: Mr. Deepak Manchanda, Advocate for the appellant. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent filed by the unsuccessful writ petitioner-appellant prayed for allotment of an industrial plot. The learned Single Judge has recorded a categorical finding that the writ petitioner-appellant was allotted five plots, which he had sold in the open market. According to learned Single Judge, it is a case of greed rather than need. We find no ground to interfere in the view taken by the learned Single Judge. 2. Accordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed. 3. Keeping in view the dismissal of appeal on merit, no orders are required to be passed on the application seeking condonation of delay of 201 days in filing of the appeal. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE December 12, 2011 Atul