CWP No. 2813 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH * * * * * CWP No. 2813 of 2008 Date of decision : November 14, 2008 * * * * * M/s Dev Builder and Colonizers (P) Ltd ............Petitioner Versus Competent authority and another ...........Respondents * * * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH * * * * * Present: Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Balwinder Singh, Advocate for the respondents. * * * * * 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? M.M KUMAR, J. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of direction to the respondent to grant licence under the name and style of Golden Enclave at Village Dhandra Thakarwal, Tehsil and District Ludhiana on land measuring 49.55 acres. In response to notice of motion, respondents have filed a written statement. When the matter came up for further consideration on 7.11.2008, it transpired that the petitioner was issued a letter dated 11.10.2006 (incorrectly mentioned in the last order as 8.11.2006) requiring him to comply with the conditions CWP No. 2813 of 2008 2 mentioned therein. In the written statement, the stand taken is that there is revised policy and accordingly further conditions are required to be complied with. Learned counsel for the petitioner had argued that at no stage compliance of additional requirements was intimated and therefore, there was no legal obligations caste on the petitioner to comply with the same. Accordingly we had issued directions to the counsel for the respondents to obtain instructions as to when the requisite licence could be issued to the petitioner. In response to the aforementioned direction, Sh. Balwinder Singh learned counsel for the respondents, has placed on record a copy of the licence dated 12.11.2008 showing that the licence has been issued to the petitioner. The same is taken on record as Mark `A'. Mr. Tushar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the instant petition has been rendered infructuous and the petitioner should be given liberty with regard to Clause No.10 because a separate letter is sought to be issued by the respondents regarding payment of CLU charges, external development charges and licence fee. In view of the above, the instant petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge any separate letter in pursuance to Clause 10 as prayed. ( M.M KUMAR ) JUDGE November 14, 2008 ( JORA SINGH ) ritu JUDGE