C.W.P. No. 18131 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 18131 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 11.11.2011 Anupama College of Engineering and Anupama Institute of Management, Gurgaon (Haryana) .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present:- Mr. Alok Jagga, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.D. Gupta, Addl. AG Haryana. **** SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J(Oral). The petitioner-College has filed the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 7.8.2009 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana dismissing the appeal filed by it under Section 10 of the Punjab Scheduled Road and Controlled Areas Restricted of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the order dated 31.10.2008 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana. It is undisputed position that the petitioner-college filed an application on 22.2.2008 for sanctioning the building plan and for compounding the earlier construction raised from the date of applicability of the aforesaid Act. The said application was returned by the Director Town and Country Planning, Haryana, vide his order dated 31.10.2008 C.W.P. No. 18131 of 2009 -2- (Annexure P-12) while observing that field staff of the Town and Country Planning was obstructing to inspect the site and the matter regarding un- authorised construction is pending in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. The petitioner filed appeal against the said order, which was disposed of vide impugned order being pre-mature. Since the application of the petitioner was simply returned without according any sanction of the building plan or compounding the earlier construction raised prior to the applicability of the Act, it does not cause any prejudice to the petitioner and it will be also open for him to file fresh application after complying with the shortcomings pointed out by the respondent-authorities, therefore, the Appellate Authority has rightly dismissed the appeal of the petitioner being premature. In view of the said position learned counsel for petitioner wants to withdraw this petition with liberty to again file an application for sanction of the building plan before the competent authority and for compounding of the other construction if so desired. Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. If such application is filed by the petitioners, the Director, Town and Country Planning, Haryana, is directed to consider the same in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within the statutory period. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE 11.11.2011 ( PARAMJEET SINGH ) reema JUDGE