IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.13753 of 2007 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.03.2011 Shri P.Norula and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : None for the petitioners. Mr. J.S.Yadav, Advocate, for Gram Panchayat,Nathupur. Ms. Promila Nain, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr. Anil Rathee, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana for respondents No. 1,3,5 and 6. Mr. Sanjay Vij, Advocate, for respondent No.7. Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Advocate, for respondent No. 8. **** RANJAN GOGOI, C.J.(Oral) This Public Interest Litigation has been filed seeking orders/directions for shifting the cremation ground which is claimed to be within the residential colony of the petitioners in DLF Phase-3, Gurgaon, Haryana. According to the petitioners, the boundary wall of the cremation ground abuts the boundary wall of the residents of the colony and the cremation ground is a source of pollution as the remains of the cremations are carried to the houses of the residents whenever there are strong winds . Counter affidavit on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon as well as the status report of the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation on the condition of the cremation ground have been brought on record. We have duly perused the same. In the status CWP No.13753 of 2007 (O&M) [2] report dated 01.05.2009, the details of work undertaken in the cremation ground have been mentioned. By order dated 16.12.2009, this Court had directed the first petitioner, who is an Advocate and has appeared in person besides representing the petitioners No.2 to 5, to establish his bonafides in presenting this Public Interest Litigation. The said order of the Court has not been complied with till date. After the order dated 16.12.2009 was passed, the case was fixed for consideration on three different dates by the Court during the calendar year 2010 i.e. 16.02.2010, 03.05.2010 and 07.12.2010. On each of the aforesaid occasions, a written request for adjournment was circulated by the petitioners which prayer was accepted by the Court. At the hearing today, the petitioners have gone unrepresented. Taking into account the above facts and upon due consideration of the status report dated 01.05.2009 we are of the view that this Public Interest Litigation should be disposed of in terms of the action taken as stated in the aforesaid report as well as the undertaking mentioned therein with regard to the provisions for erecting and commissioning of the Electric-cum-LPG-cum-Diesel Cremator & Construction of the required furnace hall etc. PIL shall stands disposed of in the above terms. (RANJAN GOGOI) CHIEF JUSTICE (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE 01.03.2011 'ravinder'