IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 995 of 1992 Date of decision: 20.07.2011 M/s Singla Traders and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. G.C. Dhuriwala, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. A.S. Mann, Addl. AG, Punjab for the State. Mr. I.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3. RANJIT SINGH J. The petitioners are the timber merchants. They have approached this Court with the grievance that direction issued by this Court long ago in the year 1991 have not been complied with so far. In the year 1984, the State of Punjab had declared new grain market at Salem Tabri. In the notification, it was mentioned that new grain market, Kesar Ganj and Barbuteshah were declared as Principal and sub market yards for all commodities except vegetables, fruits, hides and skin. Timber Merchants Administration had met Principal Secretary to Government of Punjab for providing facilities for loading and unloading of timer and the fire wood and parking of loaded vehicles in the proposed market yard of timber. The Chief Secretary, thereafter, has ordered that no market fee shall be charged from the dealers of timber and fire wood when the Civil Writ Petition No. 995 of 1992 -2- transaction take place outside the principal/sub market yards. The various dealers of timber and fire wood of the petitioner has challenged the levy of market fee and Rural Development Fund by filing the writ petitions before this Court in the year 1988. The Division Bench of this Court had then passed the order on 11.10.1991 directing the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners, keeping in view the letter issued by the Chief Secretary, Punjab dated 30.04.1991. The grievance raised is that the representation has not been decided so far. It is beyond comprehension as to how the petitioners have waited so long to pray for implementation of the order passed by this Court in the year 1991. The petitioner could easily have approached this Court if any direction issued by this Court were not being complied with. Filing the writ petition, which has remained pending for all these years, for this relief, apparently would sound little odd and absurd. In any case, without going further into this aspect, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to decide the representation, in case, it is still pending. In case, the representation has already been decided, the intimation in this regard be sent to the petitioners. This Court has not gone into the merits of the case. It would be entirely open to the respondents to take any appropriate decision in regard to the prayer made in the writ petition/representation. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. July 20, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH) rts JUDGE