In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh C.W.P. No. 1312 of 2007 Date of Decision: 01.02.2007 Vinod …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Ritu Bahri, DAG, Haryana. JUDGMENT M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral) The prayer made in the instant petition is to issue direction to the respondents to issue the petitioner permit for selling liquor. It has further been prayed that licence fee be reduced as no sale have been effected since the allotment of wine shop. In reply to the notice of motion having been issued, learned State counsel has stated that permit has already been issued to the petitioner on 25.1.2007. The aforementioned fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, the first prayer made in the petition has been rendered infructuous. C.W.P. No. 1312 of 2007 For the second prayer the petitioner is required to first raise his grievance before the authority concerned and thereafter he can approach any other forum in accordance with law. Therefore, the second prayer cannot be gone into at this stage. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (RAJESH BINDAL) February 1, 2007 JUDGE Pkapoor 2