Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Punjab and Haryana High Court: In a writ petition filed by the petitioner, publisher ‘Hind Samachar’ and ‘Punjab Kesari’ newspapers, whereby quashing of Respondent 2’s decision was sought by which relaxation from hotel’s demolition of non-approval construction was refused, a Single Judge Bench of Manisha Batra, J., held that if the construction of the hotel is not as per approved site plan, then any action taken by the statutory authority cannot be termed as a result of political vendetta. Thus, the Court disposed of the petition at hand without commenting upon merits, relegating the petitioner to avail alternate statutory remedy under Section 269 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976.
In the present case, the left front set back of the hotel petitioner was 15.37 per cent, which is 4052.54 Sq.ft. against approved 20.03per cent, which is 5280.25 Sq. ft. and its level had also been extended about +4’ 6”. Apart from this, in rear setback, a room measuring 16 feet X 27 feet was built up, which was allegedly not according to building byelaws.
It was contended that the demolition orders were passed as the petitioner was publisher of group of newspapers namely ‘Hind Samachar’ and ‘Punjab Kesari’ and these newspapers, while publishing stories/news did not toe the Government directions/policies and because of political vendetta. The petitioner sought time to demolish the unauthorized construction at its own level because, in case, the respondents were allowed to demolish the unauthorized or unapproved construction as under the garb of said demolition, the respondents were likely to demolish/damage the entire hotel structure.
The Court noted that the construction on the front and back was not as per the approved site plan and held that if the construction of the petitioner’s hotel is not as per approved site plan, then any action taken by the statutory authority cannot be termed as a result of political vendetta.
The Court perused Section 269 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 and stated that the appeal lies against orders to the Court of District Judge of the city where the premises were situated, within the period specified in the order for demolition of the erection and the petitioner instead of approaching the Court of District Judge, filed the present petition.
Thus, the Court disposed of the petition at hand without commenting upon merits, relegating the petitioner to avail alternate statutory remedy under Section 269 of the said Act. The Court further stated that since, no order on merits was passed, any assertion on merits was only meant for the purpose of deciding the preliminary objection raised by the respondents and should have no bearing on the merits of the case before any other competent statutory authority or in any other proceedings.
[Chopra Hotels (P) Ltd. v. State of Punjab, CWP No. 4023 of 2026 (O&M), decided on 10-2-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Gurmohan Preet Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent: Roshandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab
For the Complainant: Shivam Joshi, Advocate