LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/gurjit-singh-d-through-lrs-vs-union-territory-chandigarh-ors-20230303/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

Gurjit Singh (D) through Lrs vs Union Territory, Chandigarh & Ors.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
3 March 2023
Case No.
Civil Appeal Nos. 4826-4828 of 2022
Result
Dismissed
Bench
M.R. Shah, B.V. Nagarathna
Citation
[2023] 6 S.C.R. 1046 : 2023 INSC 199
Supreme Court Reports [2023] 6 S.C.R. 1046 : 2023 INSC 199
Headnote

Licence – A licence holder, if entitled to allotment of the auction platform adjacent to and/or in front of his shop as a matter of right – Held: To do business in the shop and to carry on business on the auction platform, are both different and distinct – Merely because a person is having a licence and doing business in a particular shop, he is not entitled to the auction platform as a matter of right and that too, in front of and/or adjacent to his shop – No such rule and/or regulation and/or guideline supporting such a claim was brought by the appellant to the notice of the High Court or even Supreme Court – In absence of any specific rule in favour of the appellant, right to claim the allotment just in front of his shop and/or adjacent to the same when the allotment in favour of respondent No. 5 was made as per the policy and guidelines, High Court rightly held against the appellant – Therefore, in the absence of any specific right in his favour, the appellant could not have prayed for the allotment of shed/auction platform just adjacent to and/or in front of his shop – Appeals lacks merit.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. R. SHAH, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 23.10.2013 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 2130/2011 and 2131/2011 and the subsequent order dated 17.12.2013 passed in CM No. 5249/2013 in LPA No. 2130/2011, by which, the Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the Said Letters Patent Appeals thereby confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions, the original writ petitioner has preferre
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →