CWP No. 8752 of 1988 and other connected cases 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 17.11.2010 CWP No. 8752 of 1988 Dharamvir and another ….. PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Punjab and others ….. RESPONDENTS RSA No. 381 of 1990 Satpal Tuli ….. APPELLANT VERSUS Dharamvir etc. ….. RESPONDENTS RSA No. 382 of 1990 Bodh Raj ….. APPELLANT VERSUS Dharamvir etc. ….. RESPONDENTS RSA No. 383 of 1990 Madan Mohan ….. APPELLANT VERSUS Dharamvir etc. ….. RESPONDENTS RSA No. 384 of 1990 Ashok Kumar ….. APPELLANT VERSUS Dharamvir etc. ….. RESPONDENTS RSA No. 385 of 1990 Jagan Nath ….. APPELLANT VERSUS Dharamvir etc. ….. RESPONDENTS CWP No. 8752 of 1988 and other connected cases 2 RSA No. 386 of 1990 Smt. Chanchal Rani ….. APPELLANT VERSUS Dharamvir etc. ….. RESPONDENTS RSA No. 387 of 1990 Dr. Tilak Raj ….. APPELLANT VERSUS Dharamvir etc. ….. RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Sarjit Singh, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Jagdev Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Manohar Lall, Addl. A.G. Punjab, for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Amar Singh Sandhu, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. Mr. S.D.Sharma, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Bindu Goel, Advocate, for respondents No. 4 to 14. *** Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This order will dispose of CWP No. 8752 of 1988 titled as Dharamvir and another vs. The State of Punjab and others, RSA No. 381 of 1990 titled as Satpal Tuli vs. Dharamvir etc., RSA No. 382 of 1990 titled as Bodh Raj vs. Dharamvir etc., RSA No. 383 of 1990 titled as Madan Mohan vs. Dharamvir etc., RSA No. 384 of 1990 titled as Ashok Kumar vs. Dharamvir etc., RSA No. 385 of 1990 titled as Jagan Nath vs. CWP No. 8752 of 1988 and other connected cases 3 Dharamvir etc., RSA No. 386 of 1990 titled as Smt. Chanchal Rani vs. Dharamvir etc. and RSA No. 387 of 1990 titled as Dr. Tilak Raj vs. Dharamvir etc. Facts are being taken from CWP No. 8752 of 1988. The writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to the notifications dated 30.01.1987 and 11.02.1988 issued under Sections 36 and 42 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 (for short the Improvement Act'). Vide the notifications mentioned above, 8 Kanal and 2 Marlas of land was proposed to be acquired, out of which 142 Marlas of land was ownership of the petitioners. Others have not laid challenge to the notifications mentioned above. Vide order dated 13.07.2010, it was directed as under:- “ To settle the equities, it is ordered that the Improvement Trust should offer a reasonable compensation to the petitioners in the shape of plots, which are lying vacant in the colony and also by offering a reasonable compensation for rest of the land. It is hoped that the parties will settle the matter in an amicable manner with a view to save houses of the private respondents, who are living therein for the last more than two decades.” Today in Court, an affidavit has been filed by Sh. Anil Vasudeva, Chairman, Pathankot Improvement Trust, Pathankot, who is present in Court, wherein it is stated that in the scheme in question, 28 Marlas of land, which was previously in the ownership of the petitioners, is lying vacant. It is further stated that the Trust has no objection to release that land in favour of the petitioners. CWP No. 8752 of 1988 and other connected cases 4 Counsel for the petitioners states that in terms of the statement made, if land measuring 28 Marlas is released in their favour, they shall withdraw this writ petition so far as their challenge to the acquisition of the remaining land is concerned. In this case, on the remaining land earlier owned by the petitioners, regarding which they have withdrawn their writ petition, already buildings/houses stood constructed. The petitioners had filed suits against the occupants, which were decreed and appeals against those orders were dismissed and now the matter is pending in the Regular Second Appeals and is fixed before us. In view of the settlement arrived at between the petitioners and the Improvement Trust, the petitioners state that they will not press their claim against the appellants in those Regular Second Appeals on the basis of decrees passed earlier in the suits filed by them. In view of this arrangement, we order that the decrees passed against the appellants in Regular Second appeals shall not be executed against them. All the Regular Second appeals stand dispose of. As per facts mentioned above, we dispose of this writ petition also and direct the Improvement Trust to release 28 Marlas of land in favour of the petitioners, as has been mentioned in the affidavit filed in Court today. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE November 17, 2010 pj CWP No. 8752 of 1988 and other connected cases 5