Resort row: HC refuses to issue notices to Badals for time being | punjab$chandigarh | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Feb 26, 2017-Sunday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Resort row: HC refuses to issue notices to Badals for time being

punjab Updated: Nov 18, 2015 09:12 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Hindustan Times
Punjab and Haryana high court

The petitioner, Juveeza Chadha, has challenged the land acquisition for a road at Palanpur village, leading to a resort partly owned by the ruling Badal family.(HT Photo)

The Punjab and Haryana high court on Tuesday refused to issue notices to Punjab chief minister Parkash Singh Badal and his son and deputy chief minister Sukhbir Singh Badal in a land acquisition matter pertaining to Palanpur village in SAS Nagar.

However, the high court division bench of justice Hemant Gupta and justice Raj Rahul Garg stated that whether they (Badals) are to be issued notices or not, would be decided at a later stage, if “necessity arises” during the course of hearing in the matter.

The high court allowed the application of the petitioner, wherein an amended plea incorporating some changes in the main petition (including making Badals as party) was filed and asked the state to submit its response within two weeks. The high court bench while extending the stay on construction of the controversial road has posted the matter for hearing on December 15.

The petitioner, Juveeza Chadha, has challenged the land acquisition for a road at Palanpur village, leading to a resort partly owned by the ruling Badal family.

The petitioner is a resident of Majra village, through which the controversial 100-ft-wide and 1.3-km-long road is being constructed. The resort at Palanpur village is 2 km from the point where the road ends.

The government had defended the land acquisition exercise and also opposed petitioner’s move to implead Badals as party in the case. On the other hand, the petitioner had alleged that Badals were “necessary party” in the case as they were “beneficiary” of the land acquisition.