KAMAL ANAND Vs. HUDA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these writ petitions, i.e. CWP No.3677 of 2012 and CWP No.3284 of 2009 involving a common question of law and with almost identical facts, are being disposed of together.

(2.) At the time when notice was issued in CWP No.3677 of 2012, the earlier petition (CWP No.3284 of 2009) which had been admitted to regular hearing vide order dated 24.8.2011, was also ordered to be posted for hearing along with this petition, on 13.3.2012.

(3.) In both these petitions, we are informed, and as is obvious from the addresses of the petitioners in each case, (given in the array of parties), the petitioners are husband and wife, who have challenged the resumption orders passed by the Estate Officer, Faridabad and the orders of the appellate authority, dismissing the appeals against such orders. By these orders, commercial Kiosk No.300 Sector 7, Faridabad, was ordered to be resumed (in CWP No.3284 of 2009) on 19.9.2001 by the Estate Officer and commercial Kiosk No.301, Sector 7, Faridabad, was also ordered to be so resumed by the same authority on 20.2.2001 (which is subject matter of CWP No.3677 of 2012).