Disposed

Amrik Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Sept 2015CWP/19173/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition alleging land submersion due to illegal mining. Without hearing respondents or verifying material on record, the court directed State officials to decide on the compensation claim, directing petitioners to other forums if rejected.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 to take an appropriate decision on the petitioners' claim for compensation.

Amrik Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab… — Environment and Pollution | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.19173 of 2015 Date of Decision: September 11, 2015

¶3

Amrik Singh and others

¶4

.....Petitioners

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH.

¶9

Present: Ms.Jatinder Jit Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶10

-.-

¶11

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

¶12

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

¶15

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶16

The petitioners are residents of village Raipur Arriyan Daudpur Chakoki, District Kapurthala. They allege that due to illegal mining by certain persons, the flow of Bias river stood diverted due to which over 25000 acres cultivable land has submerged in the river. The land of the petitioners is also part of the submerged land. It is claimed that a joint inspection of the flood protection work in Kapurthala district was carried out in the year 2005 in which the above mentioned allegations were found to be correct and it was recommended that affected land owners be suitably compensated but no such compensation has been disbursed so far despite repeated representations or running from pillar to post.

¶17

We have not heard the respondents at this stage. In the absence of sufficient material on record, we also do not

¶18

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.15 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

CWP No.19173 of 2015 [2]

¶20

express any opinion on the alleged inspection report relied upon by the petitioners. However, having regard to the factual issues or the claim for amount of compensation raised vide representations dated 12.07.2005, 8.12.2014 and 05.02.2015 (P-3, P-6 & P-8, respectively), attributing the cause of loss to the alleged illegal mining, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent Nos.4 & 5 to take an appropriate decision on the petitioners' claim, referred to above. In case the petitioners' claim is rejected, we make it clear that they may approach any Forum other then the Writ Court.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE

September 11, 2015 [JASPAL SINGH] mohinder JUDGE

¶25

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.15 12:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Amrik Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrik Singh and Ors. 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

Ram Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Harshbir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rajpal Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Arvind Kumar & Anr. Vs Pb Urban Development Authority & Ors.

Pala Ram and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Bahadur Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.