IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18460 of 2008 Date of Decision: January 25, 2011 Mukand Singh & others .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. S.K. Bawa, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. G.S. Attariwala, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Mr. A.S. Jattana, Advocate, for respondent No.5. Mr. H.S. Virk, Advocate, for respondent Nos.6, 7, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 21. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing Order dated 12.9.2005 CWP No.18460 of 2008 [2] (Annexure P-2) passed by respondent Nos.3 (District Development and Panchayat Officer, Sangrur) and order dated 4.5.2007 passed by respondent No.2 (Joint Development Commissioner, exercising the powers of Commissioner). 2. Short contention on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioners is that order passed by respondent No.2 stipulates that at the first instance, demarcation of the petitioners’ land would be carried out to see unauthorised occupation in the suit land and only thereafter possession of the land in dispute would be restored to the Gram Panchayat. The respondents, however, without reference to the directions given are taking action against the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 (Gram Panchayat) contends that he would have no objection to compliance of order (Annexure P-3) passed by the Joint Development Commissioner. 4. On reference to record, I find that District Development and Panchayat Officer, Sangrur (respondent No.3) found as a matter of fact that the petitioners have encroached on land comprised in Khasra No.266 (21-12) which had been kept reserved for Gair Mumkin pond. On account of encroachment, the villagers at large are suffering because the water is not flowing out of the houses and is blocked. For the personal CWP No.18460 of 2008 [3] convenience of the petitioners, they have raised some constructions to give shelter to their cattle, however, the said act is offending common use. 5. I further find that Joint Development Commissioner, vide Order Annexure P-3, upheld the order, however, has said that the District Development & Panchayat Officer would first carry out demarcation of unauthorised occupation in suit land and thereafter proceed to restore possession of the land in dispute to the Gram Panchayat. 6. In view of conceded position and further because the area is required to be utilised, by villagers, as a pond, the District Development and Panchayat Officer, Sangrur is directed to ensure exact compliance within a period of two months from today. 7. Parties shall appear before the District Development and Panchayat Officer, Sangrur on 7.2.2011. 8. The petition is accordingly disposed of. (AJAI LAMBA) January 25, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?