Disposed

Om Parkash Jindal v. Deputy Commissioner Patiala and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Nov 2015CWP/23503/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner claimed tenancy rights over land and feared dispossession by the Municipal Committee via a public notice. The High Court, declining to rule on entitlement, ordered the Deputy Commissioner to ascertain facts from both sides and pass an appropriate order within one month, maintaining status quo in the interim.

What did the court decide?

Director to Deputy Commissioner, Patiala to ascertain facts and pass order within one month; status quo till then.

Om Parkash Jindal Vs Deputy Commissioner Patiala… — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.23503 of 2015 Date of Decision: November 04, 2015

Om Parkash Jindal

....Petitioner

versus

Deputy Commissioner, Patiala and others .....Respondents

¶7

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

¶8

¶9

Present: Mr.V.K.Jindal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Amardeep Sheoran, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶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 petitioner is claimed to have purchased tenancy rights (Gair Marusi) in respect of the land which is stated to be shamlat deh and was owned by the erstwhile Gram Panchayat. The Municipal Committee, Nabha has now put a public notice at the site to the effect that the subjectland vests in Municipal Committee and no one has any right qua thereto. The aggrieved petitioner has submitted a representation claiming that he being in its lawful possession, cannot be dispossessed except in due course of law.

¶17

Still apprehending dispossession, the instant writ

¶18

petition has been filed.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any views on the petitioner's entitlement to retain possession, we dispose of this writ

¶20

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.06 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶21

[2]

¶22

CWP No.23503 of 2015

¶23

petition with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala to ascertain the correct facts from both the sides and take an appropriate decision with respect to the above-mentioned claim of the petitioner. Let an appropriate order be passed at the earliest but not later than one month from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

¶24

Till then, both the parties are directed to maintain

status-quo.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE November 04, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE

¶29

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.06 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Om Parkash Jindal v. Deputy Commissioner Patiala and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Parkash Jindal v. Deputy Commissioner Patiala 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

Gram Panchayat Vill.Nanglan Vs Director,Consolidation of Holdings Pb.

Sukhdev Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Harneet Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

State of Punjab Vs Anoop Singh Kahlon and Ors.

Kulwant Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Jagir Kaur etc. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.