Disposed

Singara Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Oct 2015CWP/22841/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerned unauthorized possession of Gram Panchayat land. The Court directed respondents to consider a petitioners' representation and initiate eviction action within six months, declining to opine on merits as specific occupants were not respondents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent Nos.3 to 6 to consider representation and initiate eviction action within six months.

Singara Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.22841 of 2015 Date of Decision: October 28, 2015

Singara Singh

....Petitioner

versus

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

¶7

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

¶8

Present: Mr.Baljinder Singh Ichhewal, 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 is resident of village Kansua Khurd, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala. It appears from the selective averments made in the writ petition that a big chunk of Gram Panchayat land was in unauthorized possession of residents of the village against whom eviction orders have been passed and the challenge to those eviction orders has also failed. It further appears that the Gram Panchayat has taken possession of a substantial part of the land but almost 15 bigha land is still in possession of the unauthorized occupants.

¶16

Since none of them is party-respondent before us and the details re: the nature of their possession are also not disclosed, we do not express any opinion on merits of the allegations. Suffice it would be to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent Nos.3 to 6 to consider the representation dated 27.07.2015 (P-2) said to have been

¶17

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.04 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

CWP No.22841 of 2015 [2]

¶19

submitted by the petitioners and if need be, let lawful action be initiated for eviction of the unauthorized occupants. It shall be appreciated if timely action is taken within six months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

¶20

Dasti.

¶21

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE October 28, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE

¶22

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.04 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Singara Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Singara Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sundeep Kaur Vs Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

Sundeep Kaur Vs Directorte of Enforcement and Anr.

Cheddi Ram Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Sanaullah Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Mohinder Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Municipal Committee Ganaur Vs Commissioner Rohtak Division & Ors.