IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.5204 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 19.8.2010 Raj Kumar ....Petitioner Versus Satya Sarup alias Vivek Sharma ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate with Ms.Bhupinder Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. This petition is directed against the order dated 27.4.2010. The petitioner filed an appeal and prayed for grant of stay while the Appellate Authority directed him to address the arguments on merits so that the matter could be disposed of. In stead of addressing the court on merits the petitioner insisted on the grant of stay when the Appellate Authority desired that it was prepared to hear the case on merits and pass an appropriate order after hearing the substantial arguments on the merits of the case. The petitioner has made a grievance of this order and relied upon Mool Chand Yadav v. Raza Buland Sugar Co.Ltd., Rampur, 1983(1) All India Land Laws Reporter 456 to contend that during the pendency of the appeal the operation of an order having serious civil consequences must be suspended. C.R.No.5204 of 2010 (O&M) -2- To the mind of this Court the grievance of the petitioner is not understandable. It is not the right of a litigant to get stay in any proceedings. The Appellate Authority was interested in disposing of the matter after hearing the petitioner on merits but instead of doing so the petitioner merely insisted on the grant of stay, which was justifiably declined. The instant petition is, therefore, a frivolous exercise and has resulted in the wastage of time of the Court for no rhyme or reason. A prayer has also been made that the proceedings before the Appellate Authority be made time bound which prayer is unjustified in the given set of circumstances of the case when the Appellate Authority was inclined to dispose of the case on merits. The petitioner who frustrated such an inclination on the part of the Appellate Authority cannot ask for time bound disposal of the appeal. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. However, this Court is restraining its hands from imposing exemplary costs upon the petitioner. The Appellate Authority shall however dispose of the appeal on the date fixed and if any application for preponement is made justifying the circumstances for the same, the Appellate Authority may consider the same appropriately. 19.8.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss