IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3653 of 2011 Date of Decision : March 01, 2011. Baldev Singh Dhanwant .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Monica Chhibber Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 to 3. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 to 3 only at this stage. Ms.Monica Chhibber Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on their behalf. Let three copies of the writ petition be handed over to her during the course of day. Since no order adverse to the interest of respondent Nos.4 to 7 is being passed, they need not be heard at this stage nor any counter-reply from respondent Nos.1 to 3 is needed at this stage. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition No.20650 of 2010 alleging that some influential C.W.P.No .3653 of 2011 2 persons have 'misappropriated' his properties on the basis of a non-existent 'General Power of Attorney' which had already been cancelled and that one of the beneficiaries is son of the former Director General of Police, Punjab due to which the Police Authorities are reluctant to take any action in the matter. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 17.12.2010 with a direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga to examine the petitioner's complaint and take appropriate action within a period of two months from the date of receiving a certified copy of the order. It is averred that after passing of the above stated order, the petitioner made a self-explanatory complaint dated 24.12.2010 (Annexure P-6) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga but no action has been taken by the police despite the aforesaid order dated 17.12.2010. It may be true that from the material on record it may not be justified to draw any adverse inference against the police authorities at this stage, nevertheless, keeping in view the nature of the allegations made by the petitioner, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga is directed to take into consideration the subsequent complaint dated 24.12.2010 said to have been submitted by the petitioner and take an action strictly as per the law within a period of one month from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga is also directed to file a compliance report in the Registry. It is clarified that these directions are being issued without prejudice to the petitioner's right to seek transfer of the investigation to some independent agency if it found that the police authorities of District C.W.P.No .3653 of 2011 3 Moga have failed to carry out the investigation in a fair and impartial manner. Similarly, this order shall not be construed as an expression of views on the allegations levelled against the private respondents. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. March 01, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE