IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 4305 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 4th April, 2011. Lakhbir Singh Petitioner through Mr. Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Anr. Respondents through Ms. Sudeepti Sharma, DAG, Punjab. 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. 4303 and 4305 of 2010 as common issues are involved in both the cases. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP No. 4305 of 2010. The petitioner seeks quashing of the eviction notice dated 21.08.2009 [Annexure P-5] passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana whereby he has been ordered to remove his shop from the premises of Fort Payal, Ludhiana. The undisputed facts are that the Fort Payal is a protected monument under the Punjab Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archeological Sites and Remains Act, 1964 and a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.10.2008 passed in CWP No. Munshi Ram v State of Punjab & Ors., CWP No. 17704 of 1997, has issued several directions for maintenance and protection of the historical protected monuments. Fort Payal is also one of such monuments. The petitioner's case is that he has purchased a plot measuring 80.22 square yards vide registered sale deed dated 29.03.2004 [Annexure P-1] and is a bona-fide purchaser for consideration. The shop in dispute is stated to have been constructed on the said piece of plot. On this premises, it is averred that the petitioner can not be treated to be an encroacher of a protected monument. The respondents have filed their reply/affidavit admitting that the petitioner purchased land measuring 19'x38', i.e., 80.22 square yards and got a site plan sanctioned from the Municipal Council, Payal on 23.06.2004. According to the respondents, the petitioner has constructed the building actually on the area measuring 19'x50' approximately and, thus, has encroached upon a part of the Fort Payal's land. The petitioner has disputed the afore-stated allegations. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana to depute a team of revenue officials to be headed by the Tehsildar of the area who shall re-demarcate the plot purchased by the petitioner vide registered sale deed dated 29.03.2004. The re-demarcation shall be held by associating the petitioner with an advance intimation to him. If it is found that the petitioner has constructed any portion of the shop beyond the plot size i.e., 19'x38' purchased by him for consideration, respondent No. 2 shall give two weeks time to him to remove such encroachment, failing which the respondents shall be at liberty to remove the encroachment at the petitioner's expense. If it is found that the petitioner's shop is within the plot purchased by him, no further action shall be called for. Till the entire exercise is carried out, status-quo shall be maintained by the parties. Disposed of. Dasti. April 04, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE