Allowed

K S Randhawa v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Nov 2008CWP/7059/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Municipal Corporation and Town Improvement Trust, Amritsar, to prioritize and remove encroachments on public roads and high-density areas. The court directed authorities to formulate a comprehensive action plan and clarified that future grievances regarding inaction must be addressed via contempt proceedings against officials.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to Municipal Corporation and Improvement Trust to formulate a plan for removing encroachments; future grievances to be handled via contempt proceedings.

K S Randhawa Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Municipal and Town Planning | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7059 OF 2008

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

DATE OF DECISION: November 18, 2008.

Parties Name

K.S. Randhawa

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

¶10

...RESPONDENTS

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH

¶12

PRESENT: Mr. R.S. Bains,

¶13

Advocate, for the petitioner

¶14

Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for respondents No. 1, 5 and 6

¶15

Mr. L.S. Virk, Advocate, for Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.

¶16

Mr. Vinish Singla, Advocate, for respondents No. 4 and 7.

¶17

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶18

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶19

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶20

T.S.THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE (oral)

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Directions issued by a Division Bench of this Court in an

¶23

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7059 OF 2008 -2-

¶24

earlier round of litigation, filed in public interest, appear to have made little difference as according to the petitioner in the present writ petition, encroachments on streets and public areas in the holy city of Amritsar continue unabated. The petitioner has, therefore, prayed for a mandamus directing the Municipal Corporation and the Town Improvement Trust, Amritsar, to take immediate steps for removal of such encroachments including those to which specific reference has been made in paras 6 and 7 of the writ petition.

¶25

In Writ Petition No. 11708 of 2002, filed for a similar relief, in public interest, this Court had by an order dated September 22, 2003, directed the Improvement Trust, Amritsar, to move the Civil Courts for vacating the injunctions, granted in different suits pending before them, and to take action for removal of such encroachments as were found to have taken place at public places within the Municipal Corporation and Improvement Trust limits. The Court had accepted the undertaking given by counsel appearing for the Improvement Trust in that regard and disposed of the writ petition in the hope that the authorities will rise to the occasion and take appropriate action for removal of the encroachments, referred to in the said writ petition. Subsequent order, passed by this Court in CM No. 25125 of 2003, reserved liberty to the petitioner in the said case to file a fresh petition in case the encroachments in the city were not removed despite the directions contained in its order dated September 22, 2003. The present writ petition is thus a sequel to the said two orders, in which the petitioner has specifically alleged that encroachments in Kabir Park area, Amritsar, and other parts of the city, referred in paras 6 and 7 of the petition, continue without any action being taken for removal of the same by either the

¶26

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7059 OF 2008 -3-

¶27

Municipal Corporation or the Improvement Trust. A mandamus directing respondents No. 3 and 4 to take appropriate action in the matter has, therefore, been prayed for apart from a prayer that a Court monitoring committee ought to be constituted to ensure the removal of such encroachments.

¶28

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents -Trust and the Corporation and Mr. Amol Rattan Singh appearing for respondents No. 1,5 and 6 submit that action has been taken and shall continue against all those who have encroached upon public property in Amritsar and that the present writ petition could be disposed of with directions to that effect by this Court.

¶29

We are in these proceedings not inclined to determine whether the encroachments in the city of Amritsar, referred to in paras 6 and 7 of the writ petition, involve any determination of title to the property encroached upon. The very nature of these proceedings is in our view not suited for any such determination. All that we are inclined to direct is that the Municipal Corporation and the Town Improvement Trust authorities at Amritsar ought to draw up a proper and comprehensive plan of action for removal of such encroachments as are found within their respective jurisdictions. We can appreciate that encroachments being a continuous process and the same having taken place over past many years at numerous places in the city, the process of removal cannot be done over night. All the same the Improvement Trust and the Municipal Corporation ought to prioritize the areas in which removals cannot brook delay while others which can be taken up in due course. Any encroachment on public roads and foot paths must in our opinion be on the top of the priority list of both the Corporation

¶30

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7059 OF 2008 -4-

¶31

and the Improvement Trust as encroachments on public thoroughfares and foot-paths cause serious inconvenience to the inhabitants of the city. Similarly, encroachments in or around market places and Institutions, which are visited by the public in large number must also get the priority of the authorities for such encroachments also create great inconvenience to those visiting such places. In addition, encroachments whether by way of dumping of garbage/ littering, scattering or displaying of goods for sale, parking of vehicles present a conducive environment for any subversive activity threatening human lives and property. Thickly populated areas with high density of floating population should, therefore, be specially taken care of by the authorities for removal of encroachments. Suffice it to say that the Municipal Corporation and the Improvement Trust would do well to identify and categorize encroachments and take suitable and effective action for removal of the same strictly in accordance with provisions of law without any further loss of time. This will include encroachments, referred to by the petitioner in paras 6 and 7 of the petition also. We make it clear that in case the petitioner or any other citizen for that matter points out any encroachments to the concerned authorities, the complaint ought to be taken note of and suitably dealt with so that the process of multiple rounds of litigation for removal of encroachments comes to an end. We further clarify that the direction issued by this Court in the present proceedings shall be deemed to be effective in future making it unnecessary for this Court to issue any further directions in the matter or entertain any other petition on the subject. This would imply that in case there is any grievance made by any citizen regarding non-removal of the encroachments or inaction or apathy on the part of the officials of the Municipal Corporation or the

¶32

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 7059 OF 2008 -5-

¶33

Improvement Trust , the next round of litigation will be only in the form of contempt proceedings against those who ignore the directions hereby issued.

¶34

This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. Respondents No. 1,5 and 6 shall lend all such assistance to the Town Improvement Trust and Municipal Corporation as may be found necessary in effectuating the steps that the said respondents may take in the matter. No costs.

¶35

( T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE

¶36

(JASBIR SINGH) JUDGE

¶37

November 18, 2008. DKC

K S Randhawa v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K S Randhawa v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Mm Dhonchak Vs Punjab & Haryana Hingh Court & Anr.

Balwant Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

H C Arora Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sarv Chander and Ors. Vs State of Pb. and Ors.

Arvind Thakur Vs State of Haryana and Ors.