CWP No. 441 of 2008. 29.04.2008 Present: Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General and Mr. J.K. Verma, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 1, 3 and 4. Mr. B.C. Negi, Advocate, for respondent No.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. It has been emphatically submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the written arguments were submitted before the Divisional Commissioner, inter alia on various grounds including the ground of delay and laches and the same question was argued as well. However, it has not been considered by the Divisional Commissioner. Learned Counsel, Mr. B.C. Negi, appearing for respondent No.2 gets full marks from this Court because he fairly conceded this proposition. In the circumstances, we would like to observe that the fairness and honesty on the part of the Counsel is the foundation of the judicial system and today Mr. Negi has demonstrated the same. In the light of the above, the order of the Divisional Commissioner is quashed. Hence consequences to follow. The matter is remanded to the Divisional Commissioner for reconsideration of the arguments raised on behalf of the petitioner. Parties agree to appear before the Divisional Commissioner on 6th May, 2008. It would be open for the Divisional Commissioner to hear the matter on the same day or according to his judicial engagements may give another date for hearing. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of, so also the other applications. (Jagdish Bhalla), C.J. April 29, 2008. ( Rajiv Sharma ), J. (tm)