IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-12211 of 2008 Date of decision : 28.11.2008 Mange Ram .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. A.S.Trikha, Advocate the petitioner. Mr. Amit Kaushik, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for the respondents S. D. ANAND, J. The parole plea of the petitioner-prisoner came to be declined vide order dated 10.12.2007 (Annexure P-1) on the premise that “there are three other cases against the convict which are under consideration”. Though the grant of parole is not a right vested in a prisoner, it also cannot be said that a parole plea can be declined on the basis of a vague averment by the competent authority. The order of indicated category must indicate the precise premise on which the parole plea is being rejected. The competent authority did not elaborate the exact connotation of the underlined expression. The petition shall stand allowed. The impugned order dated 10.12.2007 ( Annexure P/1) is set aside. The competent authority is directed to pass an order afresh within one month from today in the light of the observation made by this Court. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the Competent Authority. Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Court Secretary. November 28, 2008 (S.D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE