This story is from February 20, 2002

Judgment on Bansi Lal plea reserved

CHANDIGARH:The Punjab and Haryana High Court, on Tuesday, reserved the judgment on the writ petition filed by former Haryana chief minister Bansi Lal, seeking directions for the release of his dues when he was the Leader of the Opposition in the Haryana Vidhan Sabha in 1999.
Judgment on Bansi Lal plea reserved
chandigarh:the punjab and haryana high court, on tuesday, reserved the judgment on the writ petition filed by former haryana chief minister bansi lal, seeking directions for the release of his dues when he was the leader of the opposition in the haryana vidhan sabha in 1999. the judgment was reserved by the division bench of justices swatanter kumar and mehtab singh gill after the arguments were concluded both by the counsel for the petitioner and the state of haryana.
1x1 polls
the bench also perused the record which had been summoned from the vidhan sabha to ascertain some of the facts which had been pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner. bansi lal has claimed that he was the leader of the opposition in the haryana vidhan sabha from july 25 to december 14, 1999.the speaker of the vidhan sabha, it was further submitted, had duly conveyed to the petitioner his recognition as the leader of the opposition. subsequently, he wrote a letter to state chief minister that though he had been recognised as the leader of the opposition, he was not getting the amenities which go with the post. in haryana as also punjab, the leader of the opposition in the state assembly enjoys the status of a cabinet rank minister and is extended pay and perks accordingly, including the secretarial staff. the petitioner said he received a letter from the chief secretary in february 2000 saying he was no longer the leader of the opposition as the house had been dissolved. however, the counsel for the petitioner pointed out that he was the duly recognised leader of the opposition during the specified period as the speaker''s order had not been recalled. contempt notice to advocate: the division bench of justices amarbir singh gill and vm jain, on monday, issued notice for march 11 to faridabad-based advocate op sharma to show cause as to why proceedings under the contempt of court act be not initiated against him for allegedly making derogatory remarks against the court and judicial officers in an interview telecast live on april 3, 14, and october 24, 2001 by a local television channel of faridabad. the orders came on a petition filed by ashok arora of faridabad.the petitioner also submitted that a number of criminal cases including one on the complaint of a judicial officer as also some contempt petitions, were pending against the respondent. the petitioner has submitted the videotapes as also the transcript of the interview of the respondent which was telecast. judgment reserved: the judgment on the death sentence awarded to mandeep alias kala, santokh singh, shekhar chand and sunil malik and the five-year rigorous imprisonment awarded to rajbir singh, all from gurgaon, was on tuesday reserved by the division bench of justices amarbir singh gill and vm jain. the gurgaon additional district and sessions judge had passed the orders in this respect on november 13, 2001.the same was referred to the high court by the trial court for consideration and confirmation. the death sentence had been given for brutal murder of pritam singh alias gurprit singh, a resident of murerikhurd village in amritsar district, who had purchased two trucks from santokh singh. the dispute arose over registration and delay in transferring the same. according to the fir registered with the gurgaon sadar police station on june 19, 1998, the deceased was abducted by four people who murdered him and after tying his hands and legs threw him into a drain. the dead body was recovered a day later. parking issue:the chandigarh administration and the municipal corporation, chandigarh have been directed by the punjab and haryana high court to ascertain as to which part of the parking area of the high court comes under the two authorities and how could the general public be excluded from using it.
End of Article
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA