IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No.3381 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.1.2009. The State of Haryana ....Petitioner Versus Ashok Kumar and others ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr.Navneet Singh, AAG Haryana. Mr.Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr.M.S.Chahal, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr.Sudhir Hooda, Advocate for respondent No.3. RAJESH BINDAL, J. **** Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated March 8, 2008, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Loharu, wherein in a suit for mandatory injunction filed by respondent No.1 seeking a direction to the petitioner and performa respondents to make arrangements in respect of providing street light. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the impugned order is stated to have been passed in Lok Adalat but the tone and tenor of the same shows that it is a kind of adjudication order where there was no consent of the parties while passing the order. He further submitted that even the suit filed by respondent C.R. No.3381 of 2008 (O&M) -2- No.1 was not maintainable before the Civil Court as it was a public interest litigation. The fact that the impugned order passed by the learned Court below is not passed upon the consent of the parties is not even disputed by learned counsel for respondents. Once the factum of the order being not passed on the consent of the parties is not in dispute it cannot be said to have been passed in Lok Adalat. Adjudication in a suit could be after framing of issues and recording evidence of the parties. Accordingly the impugned order dated 8.3.2008 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Court below for consideration in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear on February 21, 2009. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. (RAJESH BINDAL) 20.1.2009 JUDGE Reema