Civil Writ Petition No. 3173 of 1988 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 3173 of 1988 Date of decision : 02.03.2010 Jagmal Singh ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana and others ....Respondents BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) Challenge in the present petition is to the impugned orders dated 19.09.1984 (Annexure P-3) passed by Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Narnaul on an application of one Raghubir Parshad (Annexure P-1) preferred under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 for ejectment of the petitioner who was Sarpanch of the Village Bocharia at the relevant time from the Ahata No. 206 House No. 366 covered within an area of 250 Sq. yards in the Abadi Deh. and the order passed in appeal dated 05.11.1985 (Annexure P-5) by the Collector, Narnaul vide which the appeal was dismissed and also order dated 23.11.1987 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Hissar & Amabala Division dismissing the revision petition of the petitioner. The Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Narnaul had ordered to remove the illegal possession of the land in dispute and ejectment of the petitioner from the land in dispute vide impugned order P-3. The Gram Civil Writ Petition No. 3173 of 1988 2 Panchayat was ordered to take possession of the land. The appeal and revision against the order of Assistant Collector Ist grade have been dismissed by Collector, Narnaul and Commissioner (Appeals) Hisar and Ambala Divisions (Haryana) vide order dated 05.11.1985 (Annexure P-5) and order dated 23.11.1987 (Annexure P-7) respectively. The present civil writ petition has been preferred against the said orders. Nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Same was the situation on the last date of hearing. It was thus directed that counsel who was earlier representing the petitioner be informed of the next date of hearing. According to the report from the registry, notice was served on Sh. R.K. Verma, Advocate who was representing the petitioner. However, petitioner remains unrepresented despite the fact that case has been called out several times since morning. It appears that the petitioner is no longer interested in pursuing this petition. Dismissed for want of prosecution. March 02, 2010 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE