Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna

JUDGMENT

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 preferred the present appeals.

2. The facts leading to the present appeals in a nutshell are as under:

2.1 That the Appellant became the owner of Shop No. 27 situated in the Agricultural Produce Market, Chandigarh. Respondent No. 5 herein was the tenant of the said shop. Both the Appellant as well as Respondent No. 5 were holding the requisite licences to do business in the market area. Ejectment proceedings were initiated by the Appellant against Respondent No. 5. The order of ejectment came to be confirmed by the High Court. Therefore, Respondent No. 5 shifted as a tenant to Shop No. 12 in the year 2007 and applied for change of address to the new shop, however, the same was rejected and Respondent No. 5 was asked to surrender his licence and apply for new one. The Appellant applied for licence for selling fruits/vegetables and State Agricultural Marketing Board issued the same. Since then, the Appellant is running the business from Shop No. 27 owned by him. Respondent No. 5 filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the order dated 05.07.2007 by which his application for change of address to the new Shop No. 12 was rejected. The order dated 05.07.2007 was stayed. The stay was continued up to 31.03.2009 i.e., till the validity of licence of Respondent No. 5. That thereafter, the Market Committee, Chandigarh rejected the application of Respondent No. 5 for renewal of licence. The same was the subject matter of another writ petition before the High Court being Writ Petition No. 5886/2009. That pursuant to the order passed by the High Court, Respondent No. 5 continued to function as per the old licence. That the Licence Committee constituted under Licensing of Auction Platform Rules, 1981 decided that the site in the platform would be allotted on the basis of "One Site One Shop" and the name of Respondent No. 5 was shown as co-allottee along with the Appellant. Aggrieved with this, the Appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court, being Writ Petition No. 12684/2009. The High Court by a common judgment and order dated 26.09.2011 allowed Writ Petition No. 5886/2009 filed by Respondent No. 5 and directed that the licence of Respondent No. 5 be renewed. The High Court also held that Respondent No. 5 is entitled to use the platform in front of Shop No. 27 till any alternative policy comes by way of amendment in the Act or the Rules, pertaining to the issue of rights to use the platform. The learned Single Judge also held that right to use the platform and to have the licence to do the business in the