Disposed

Sushil Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Oct 2015CWP/21924/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the delay in demarcation and decision of eviction proceedings. It directed the relevant authority to complete demarcation within one month and decide the pending proceedings within six months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conduct demarcation within one month and decide pending eviction proceedings within six months.

Sushil Kumar Vs State of Haryana… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.21924 of 2015 Date of Decision: October 13, 2015

Sushil Kumar

....Petitioner

versus

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

¶8

Present: Mr.Satbir Gill, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶9

-.-

¶10

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

¶11

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

¶14

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶15

The petitioner has initiated eviction proceedings against respondent Nos.6 & 7 under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, as applicable to the State of Haryana, on the plea that they are in unauthorized occupation of the Gram Panchayat land fully described in para No.2 of the writ petition. It appears that the District Revenue Officer-cum-Collector before whom the petition is pending, allowed the application for carrying-out demarcation but despite repeated orders, no demarcation has been made so far. As the proceedings are lying stand-still, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner however without expressing any views on the allegations made by him as we have not heard the official as well as privaterespondents at this stage, we deem it appropriate to dispose

¶17

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.02 11:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

[2]

¶19

CWP No.21924 of 2015

¶20

of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.3 before whom the eviction proceedings are pending, to decide the same expeditiously and in accordance with the principles of natural justice. It is directed that demarcation, if so required, shall be carried out within a period of one month from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order and the pending proceedings be preferably decided within six months thereafter.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE

October 13, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE

¶25

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.02 11:35 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Sushil Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Daljit Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Buta Singh Vs Director Rural Dev of Panchayats & Ors.

Jarnail Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Balshinder Singh and Anr. Vs Niranjan Singh

Om Parkash Vs State of Haryana Th Principal Secretary to Govt of Haryana and Ors.

Sewak Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.