Focal Point Phase VIII Industrial Association (Regd.) v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 25 May 2011
- Bench
- AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Outcome
Dismissed
The writ petition stands dismissed
Judgment
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ...... Respondents Present : Mr. Sudeep Mahajan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sham Lal Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner. **** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL) The challenge in this writ petition is to the orders dated
Operative part
8.3.2011 (Annexure P-17) and 10.5.2011 (Annexure P-18). It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the orders passed by this Court in CWP No. 19073 of 1996 titled ' Jeewan Parbhat Jain vs. State of Punjab & others', as also CWP No. 2435 of 2010 titled ' M/s Luxmi Caste Forge vs. State of Punjab and others', have not been complied with. His further contention is that these orders cannot be sustained as the computation made therein while considering the claim of the petitioner have not been followed as mandated by the said orders. As per the contention of the counsel for the petitioner if the impugned orders violate the orders passed by this Court, the contempt petition would be appropriate remedy available to the petitioner. As regards the computation of the amount is concerned, which according to the counsel is not correct. Civil Writ Petition No. 9377 of 2011 -2- This Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction will not delve into calculations as it is not well-equipped to embark upon such an exercise and thus would not entertain such a claim. The petitioner may, thus, avail any other alternative remedy in accordance with law. The writ petition stands dismissed.
25.5.2011 'sp' (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition stands dismissed
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 25 May 2011. The bench was AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.