Disposed

Jagir Kaur etc. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Nov 2015CWP/23583/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the Deputy Commissioner and District Development and Panchayat Officer to ascertain facts regarding encroachment on public land and expedite eviction proceedings within two months, ensuring execution of existing orders or conducting fresh demarcation if disputed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Deputy Commissioner and District Development and Panchayat Officer to ascertain facts and expedite eviction proceedings within two months.

Jagir Kaur etc. Vs State of Punjab… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.23583 of 2015 Date of Decision: November 04, 2015

¶3

Jagir Kaur and another

¶4

....Petitioners

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

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

¶9

¶10

Present: Mr.Rajinder Kumar Singla, Advocate,

¶11

for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, Additional AG, Punjab.

¶13

-.-

¶14

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

¶15

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶16

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶17

¶18

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶19

Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 to 4 only at

¶20

this stage.

¶21

On our asking, Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on their behalf.

¶22

Let four copies of the writ petition be supplied to the State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶23

In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, we do not deem it necessary to issue notice to respondent Nos.5 to 17 as no order prejudicial to their interest is being passed on merits. Reply-affidavit from the officialrespondents is also not necessary.

¶24

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.18 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶25

CWP No.23583 of 2015

¶26

[2]

¶27

The case set-up by the petitioners is that the private-respondents have encroached upon a part of public passage (Phirni) comprising khewat No.340/41, khatoni No.406, khasra No.71/29-0 of their village. It is further alleged that eviction orders under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 were passed against some of them. Repeated efforts have been made to get those orders executed but on account of influence exerted by the private-respondents, those orders are not being given effect. On this premise, it is alleged that private-respondents still continue to occupy the Gram Panchayat land.

¶28

The petitioners served a legal notice dated 18.07.2015 (P-12) to sensitize the authorities of their responsibility towards execution of the eviction orders. That notice was acknowledged by the B.D.P.O., Noormahal vide memo dated 10.08.2015 wherein a resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat on 03.08.2015 is also referred to. Vide the aforesaid memo, Naib Tehsildar, Noormahal has been requested to send the demarcation report in respect of the public passage.

¶29

The petitioners have further alleged that instead of giving effect to the eviction order, one of the privaterespondent, namely, Hazari Singh has instituted a civil suit for permanent injunction against the petitioners in the Civil Court at Phillaur.

¶30

As the facts would speak for themselves, if there are eviction orders passed against the unauthorized occupants of the public passage, those orders must be given effect and if need be, a fresh demarcation can be carried out for that purpose. We thus dispose of this writ petition with a direction

¶31

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.18 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶32

[3]

¶33

CWP No.23583 of 2015

¶34

to the Deputy Commissioner and the District Development and Panchayat Officer, Jalandhar, to ascertain the true facts from the Gram Panchayat and expedite the execution proceedings, if any pending, so as to take the execution orders to logical conclusion. If the private-respondents have taken a plea that eviction order has already been executed, a fresh demarcation can be carried out to verify the correct facts. We are quite sure that no civil court will interfere in a matter which may cause legal impediment against execution of the order(s) passed by the Court of competent jurisdiction. The authorities will do the needful within a period of two months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE

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

¶39

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.11.18 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Jagir Kaur etc. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagir Kaur etc. 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

Statutes considered

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.

Om Parkash Jindal Vs Deputy Commissioner Patiala and Ors.

Kulwant Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.