IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 21554 of 2008 Date of Decision: 22.09.2009 Harbhajan Singh ..Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA 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? Present : Mr. Brijeshwar Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vineesh Singhal, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. Mr. Jitender Kumar, Advocate, for respondents No. 5 and 6. ***** T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral) Respondents No. 5 and 6 have filed their affidavit, inter- alia, stating that they have shut down the commercial activities from the residential premises in question and have also deposited the costs imposed upon them vide order dated 20.07.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, seeks time to verify this position and make his submissions. It is in our view unnecessary to keep this petition pending in light of the affidavit filed CWP No. 21554 of 2008 [2] by respondents No. 5 and 6. Since respondents No.5 and 6 have on oath stated that they have shut down the commercial activities in question from the residential premises, we see no reason to disbelieve their version. If the statement is found to be factually incorrect at any stage, the petitioner not only shall have the liberty to move this Court for initiation of contempt proceedings but also have the liberty to get the writ petition revived for further action in the matter. In the result, we take the affidavit filed by respondents No.5 and 6 on record and dispose of this writ petition with the above observation. No costs. (T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) JUDGE 22.09.2009 'ravinder'