IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 17495 of 2010 Date of Decision: 27.9.2010. Dr. Surender Kumar Rathee --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. A.K. Rathee, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 4 only. Mr. R.D. Sharma, D.A.G., Haryana and Mr. Ajay Nara, Advocate present in the Court have been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2 to 4. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking a direction to respondents no.2 to 4 to take action against respondent no.5 for violation of various zoning plan and various other bye-laws etc. It is admitted position in the writ petition that respondent no.5 made certain complaints against the petitioner, whereas the petitioner also made certain complaints against respondent no.5. Both the petitioner's wife and respondent no.5 are business competitors running nursing homes in the same area. The petitioner has made a complaint against respondent no.5 for encroachment and construction beyond permissible area etc. A copy of the complaint dated 12.7.2010 has been placed on record but respondent no.4 has not CWP. No. 17495 of 2010 -2- taken any action thereon. This petition has been accordingly filed seeking a direction against the official respondents to take action against the private respondent. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.4 to examine the complaint filed by the petitioner (Annexure P-8) and proceed according to law. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 27.9.2010. lucky