CWP No.2827 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.2827 of 2010 Date of decision: 03.08.2011 Balwinder Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: - Mr. S.S. Sodhi, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Vikas Mehsempuri, Advocate, for respondent No.4. None for respondent No.5. 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? ***** ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL) Respondent No.4 in para No.10 of reply has stated as under: - “That the contents of para No.10 of the writ petition as stated are wrong and incorrect, hence denied. Infact, te said land is being leased out on year to year basis and the same was leased out to one Mohinder Singh son of Bharpur Singh w.e.f. 24.4.2009 for one year for a sum of Rs.43,700/- and at present, the same is on lease with one Teja Singh for one year for a sum of Rs.57,000/- and the said lease is going to expire in April, 2011. As ad when the said lease expired, the answering respondents will take every steps to shift the Hadda Rori from the existing place to its proposed site. In case, the lease is cancelled, further legal complications will arise and it will also cause financial loss to the lessor as well as the Gram Panchayat.” Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and State have fairly stated that respondent No.4 shall make compliance of the CWP No.2827 of 2010 2 statement made in paragraph No.10 of the reply. Learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly stated that present writ petition be disposed of in the light of statement made in paragraph No.10 of the reply filed by respondent No.4. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Alok Singh) Judge August 03, 2011 R.S.