Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 2462 (PNJ)

Ravel Singh Randhawa v. Union Of India

2006-07-04

H.S.BHALLA, VINEY MITTAL

body2006
Judgment Viney Mittal and j. JJ. 1. Notice of motion to the respondents. On the asking of Court, Shri Rajiv Sharma, Advocate and Shri Ashok Jindal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana accept notice on behalf of respondents No.1, 2 and 3, respectively. The petitioner claims himself to 1984 riots victim. On that basis, he claims that he is entitled to ex-gratia grant of rs.1,25,000/- in terms of clause 1 (ii) of the policy instructions dated january 10,2006 (Annexure P.1 ). 2. For the aforesaid claim, the petitioners has already made a representation dated March 20,2006 (Annexure P.2) which still remains unresponded. Consequently, we dispose of the present petition with a request to the Chief Secretary, State of Haryana to take a final decision upon the aforesaid representation filed by the petitioner within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is received, by passing a detailed speaking order. A copy of the order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.