RAJINDER SINGH Vs. U T CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE to the orders Annexures P3, P4 and P6 passed respectively by the Assistant Estate Officer (exercising the powers of Estate Officer), Chandigarh, the Chief Administrator and the Adviser to the Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh, which have been impugned in this writ petition has more or less become academic in view of the developments which have taken place during the pendency of the writ petition.

(2.) A look at the order Annexure P3 shows that the Assistant Estate Officer had initiated action against the petitioner under Rule 15 of the Chandigarh Milk Colony Allotment of Sites Rules, 1975. It was alleged that the petitioner had not constructed building within a period of one year from the date of allotment and, therefore, his lease was liable to be cancelled. The Assistant Estate Officer did not feel satisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner and cancelled the lease granted to the petitioner. The Chief Administrator and the Adviser to the Administrator confirmed the order passed by the Assistant Estate Officer subject to certain conditions.

(3.) TODAY , the learned counsel for the respondents stated that all the violations have been removed by the petitioner.