Disposed

Inder Bir Singh Chatwal v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Aug 2012CWP/11052/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking removal of unauthorized occupation of a passage on Gram Panchayat land. Court directed the Deputy Commissioner to ensure the entire land is cleared based on respondents stating partial removal.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana to ensure that the entire land of Khasra No. 278 is cleared from unauthorized occupation.

Inder Bir Singh Chatwal Vs State of Punjab and… — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No. 11052 of 2012

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

CWP No. 11052 of 2012 Date of decision : 21.8.2012

¶6

Inder Bir Singh Chatwal .......Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Punjab through its Secretary and others

¶9

.......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh, Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

¶11

Present:Mr. Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Alok Jain, Addl. AG, Punjab Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No. 3

¶12

Jasbir Singh, Acting Chief Justice (oral)

¶13

Reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2, is taken on

¶14

record.

¶15

This writ petition has been with a prayer that un-authorised occupation of a passage in Khasra No. 278, which is the ownership of Gram Panchayat village Pawa, be got cleared from respondent No. 3.

¶16

In response to notice issued, reply has been filed by respondents No.1 and 2, para 4 of which reads thus :-

¶17

“that regarding para No.4 of the petition, it is submitted that respondent directed the revenue staff to remove the encroachment. As per letter No. 476/ Reader of Naib Tehsildar, Sahnewal, dated 13.8.2012 the wall raised on the Rasta has been demolished and as such the obstruction on the rasta has been removed. The translated copy from Punjabi to

¶18

CWP No. 11052 of 2012

¶19

-2-

¶20

English version of letter No. 476/ Reader dated 13.8.2012 is annexed herewith as Annexure R-1.”

¶21

It is categorically stated that after demarcation, boundary wall existing on the Panchayat land has been demolished. To say so, reference has been made to a report submitted by Naib Tehsildar, Sahnewal dated 13.8.2012 (Annexure R-1) to the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana.

¶22

At this stage, counsel for the petitioner states that whole of the land and the passage have not been cleared

¶23

The ownership of Gram Panchayat on Khasra No. 278 is not in dispute, therefore, the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana is directed to ensure that entire land, falling under Khasra No. 278, is cleared from the un-authorised occupation of respondent No.3 or any body else.

¶24

With above directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶25

(Jasbir Singh) Acting Chief Justice

¶26

(Rakesh Kumar Jain) Judge 21.8.2012 Ashwani

Inder Bir Singh Chatwal v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Inder Bir Singh Chatwal v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arch Consultancy Services (P) Ltd. Vs the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation

Raj Verma & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Prem Kumar Gupta Vs Union of India and Others

Harender Singh Kundu Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Harinder Pal Singh Ishar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Balvir Singh etc. Vs State of Punjab etc.