CWP No. 3196 of 2010. ::-1-:: IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 3196 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 20th July, 2010. Jagjit Singh Petitioner through Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. Respondents through Mr. H.S.Brar, Addl.AG, Punjab. Mr. Salil Sagar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Samarth Sagar, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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] This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 14846, 15511, 16724 of 2009, 3196, 3197 to 3205, 3207, 3209, 3211, 3218, 3220, 3222, 3224, 3226, 3228, 3229,3231, 3233 to 3236, 3255, 3257, 3353, 3355, 3356, 4035, 4039 to 4047, 4153, 4212, 4252, 4271, 4443, 4483, 4355 to 4361, 6327, 6375, 8698 to 8708 of 2010 as common issues are involved as all these cases pertain to alleged encroachments made on Khasra No. 70, Old G.T.Road, Revenue Estate Phillaur, District Jalandhar. [2]. The petitioners's case is that they purchased their respective properties comprising the shops/houses etc. and abutting the Old G.T.Road at Phillaur from the Rehabilitation Department and/or in re-sale. Their positive case is that the shops/buildings constructed by them fall in Khasra No. 63. The Municipal Council, Phillaur – respondent No. 3, however, has served the petitioners with the impugned notices alleging that after the demarcation, it has been found that their buildings in question fall in Khasra No. 70 which comprises the old G.T.Road. On this premise, it is claimed that the petitioners have encroached upon the 'public property'. The CWP No. 3196 of 2010. ::-2-:: impugned notices have been issued to the petitioners in purported compliance of the order dated 06.07.2010 passed by this Court in CWP No. 15196 of 2003 [Brij Mohan v State of Punjab & Ors.], the relevant part whereof reads as follows:- “Be that as it may, in this situation, the encroachments can not be allowed to remain. We accordingly issue a direction to the Municipal Council that the encroachments will be removed within a period of three months from the date that a certified copy of this order is supplied to it and, if any encroachment is found on the public road, such encroachment will not be regularized under any circumstances”. [3]. The real controversy that arises for consideration is as to whether the buildings constructed by the petitioners fall in Khasra No. 63 or Khasra No. 70? [4]. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the point in issue requires a firm finding of fact by the Revenue Authorities by affording reasonable opportunities to both the parties to lead their respective evidence. It may be noticed here that there are more than one contradictory demarcation reports which do not lead to any firm conclusion. In these peculiar circumstances and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petitions are disposed of with the following directions:- [i] the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Phillaur shall be the Competent Authority to determine the subject controversy, noticed above; [ii] since only the specific Khasra Number in possession of the petitioners needs to be identified, there shall be no necessity to invite pleadings from the parties. However, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Phillaur shall grant five opportunities to each party to lead their respective oral and/or documentary evidence to prove the identification of the Khasra Number[s], when the buildings have been erected. The parties shall lead examination-in-chief by CWP No. 3196 of 2010. ::-3-:: way of affidavits though the witnesses shall be produced for cross-examination. [iii] the SDM shall return a categoric finding as to whether the constructions raised by the petitioners are on Khasra No. 63 or 70. The proceedings shall be concluded and report shall be submitted within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is received. [iv] in case it is found that the buildings or part thereof are on Khasra No. 70, the Municipal Council, Phillaur shall be at liberty to forward the case of the petitioners for compounding to the State Government, who shall then take an appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of one month. However, the decision to compound shall be in consonance with the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 6.7.2010, re- produced above; [v] Status-quo shall be maintained till then. [5]. Disposed of. Dasti. July 20, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE