The High Court disposed of a writ challenge against the puccing of an existing katcha path for road construction, noting that parties agreed nothing survived.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
::1::
CWP No.11270 of 2009 (O & M)
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.11270 of 2009 (O & M) Date of Decision: March 27, 2012
Kuldip and another
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
Present: Mr. N.K. Malhotra, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. S.S. Pattar, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. J.S. Cooner, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3.
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
The grievance of the petitioners in the present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is that the respondent department had started construction of Pucca Link Road in less than 5 Karams path and declaring non-feasible where path is less than 4 Karams, which according to the petitioners belongs to them. As per the averments made in the petition, the same was done without acquiring the land which is not legally permissible.
::2::
CWP No.11270 of 2009 (O & M)
adjoining to the land of the petitioners and 4 Karams wide thereafter. It has further been stated that no land of the petitioners is being used for the said purpose. A preliminary objection No.1 has been raised wherein it has been so stated, which reads thus:
“1. That the road from village Kharak Jattan to village Lakhan majra, Distt. Rohtak is being constructed on the existing katcha path, which is 3 karams wide adjoining to the land to the petitioners and subsequently 4 karams wide thereafter. No extra land is being taken for constructing the road in question and the existing passage is being made pucca as shown in road map in colour “Blue” (Annexure R/1) and Aks- Shijra (Annexure R/2). The proposed road in question is being constructed keeping in view the public interest and convenience of the vill agers and the farmers will be benefited so as take their agriculture produce to Mandi/Purchase centre as the proposed road will reduce the distance between the two villages considerably. As such the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed being misuse and abuse of the process of law.
3. In view of the above, learned counsel for the parties are
ad idem that nothing survives in this writ petition and the same stands disposed of accordingly.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
March 27, 2012 sukhpreet
Kuldip
State of Haryana
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
