IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3030 of 2010 Date of decision: 30th July, 2010 Daldip Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Upendra Prashar, Advocate for Mr. Rajesh K. Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Puri, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. Manohar Dadwal, Advocate for respondent No.4. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) In the present writ petition, a prayer has been made that auction notice dated 9th February, 2010 (Annexure P-5) be quashed. In para 3 of the writ petition, it has been averred as under: “3. That the respondent No.4 issued a proclamation for public auction of standing trees in Khasra Nos. 1011, 1015, 1016/1, 1977, 1978, 1989, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1950, 1951, 1979, 1985 and 1986 situated in village Rampur Haler, PS Hajipur, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur on 16.2.1983.” It is stated that on 16th February, 1983, petitioner had given the highest bid of Rs.81,000/- for the trees in above noted Khasra numbers and thereafter, his bid was confirmed on deposit of 1/4th of the Civil Writ Petition No.3030 of 2010 total bid price with the Gram Panchayat. The auction was approved by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur and the petitioner became an absolute owner of the standing trees in plot No.2. It is stated that since later-on the auction was cancelled, petitioner had to file a suit for declaration as well as permanent injunction. The Civil Court on 23rd July, 1986 decreed the suit and passed a judgment and decree (Annexure P-2), the concluding portion of which reads as under: “9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, auction in favour of the plaintiff stands and there is no legal cancellation thereof. The plaintiff has, therefore, proved his case ex-parte. As such an ex-parte decree with costs in favour of the plaintiff and against all the defendants is granted for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff is the owner/purchaser in public auction held on 16.2.1983 by defendant No.6 under supervision of defendant No.5 and approved by defendant No.3 of the trees standing in the land in dispute fully described in the head note of the plaint with permanent injunction as consequential relief restraining the defendants from claiming any right in the trees standing in the land in dispute except the right of balance sale price of the trees under the terms of balance sale price of the trees under the terms of the auction. Ex-parte decree sheet be prepared accordingly and file be consigned to the Record Room.” The head-note of the decree reads as under: “Suit for declaration with permanent injunction as consequential relief to the effect that plaintiff is the owner/purchaser in Public Auction held on 16.2.83 by defendant No.6 under the supervision of defendant No.5 and approved by deft. No.3 of the trees standing in plot No.2 of the defendant No.6 bearing Kh. No.1011, 1015, 1016/1, 1977, 1978, 1989, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1950, 1951, 1979, 1985 and 1986 situated in village Rampur Haler, P.S. 2 Civil Writ Petition No.3030 of 2010 Hajipur, Tehsil Dasuya and such the defendants be restrained from claiming any right in the trees standing in plot No.2 with Kh. Nos. as detailed above.” The decree stated that the defendants are restrained from claiming any right over the trees standing in the land in dispute, fully described in the head-note of the plaint, except the right of balance sale price of the trees under the terms of the auction. It is pleaded in the writ petition that respondents be restrained from cutting/auctioning the trees standing in those Khasra numbers, for which a decree had been passed. Mr. Manohar Dadwal, Advocate appearing for respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat, has stated that the Gram Panchayat has issued no notice regarding auction of the trees standing in Khasra numbers, for which the judgment and decree (Annexure P-2) was passed. Mr. J.S. Puri, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, has filed written statement on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. Para 1 of the preliminary objections of the same reads as under: “1. That the present writ petition is not maintainable because the answering respondent has not issued the auction notice of Khasra No.1011, 1015, 1016/1, 1977, 1978, 1989, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1010, 1950, 1951, 1979, 1985 and 1986. In fact the respondent No.4 wants to auction the Khasra No.768, 793, 1233, 1252, 1409, 1411, 1432, 1448, 1469, 1470, 1471, 1475, 1476, 1477, 1481, 1483, 1526, 1534. Thereafter, the permission from the Forest Department was obtained. A true typed copy of the permission is being annexed as Annexure R-1. Thereafter, the auction notice was issued by the respondent No.4 for auctioning of trees. Thus, this petition may kindly be dismissed.” 3 Civil Writ Petition No.3030 of 2010 In view of the categoric stand taken by the Gram Panchayat and by the State, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the judgment and decree (Annexure P-2) shall be strictly complied with by the respondent-Gram Panchayat and no trees, which were subject matter of the judgment and decree (Annexure P-2), shall be put to auction till the judgment and decree stands. This direction has been issued in view of the stand taken by respondents, however in case, still any grievance of the petitioner persists he shall approach the executing Court for enforcement of the decree or in case of disobedience shall invoke Order 39 Rule 2A of Civil Procedure Code. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE July 30, 2010 rps 4