C.W.P. No.22324 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.22324 of 2010 Date of Decision: 15.12.2010 Jaspal Singh and others ……Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ……Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI -.- Present: Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner. 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? AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) By this petition the petitioner has challenged the demarcation report (Annexure P/-3). Earlier the alleged encroachment of the petitioners were sought to be demolished for the construction of railway over bridge. The petitioner filed C.W.P. No.2325 of 2010 in which the following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the present writ petition, he will confine his prayer only to the extent that in their presence, demarcation of the area be carried out and in case the petitioners are found to be encroachers, they themselves will remove the encroachments. C.W.P. No.22324 of 2010 -2- Mr.Arvind Mittal, Advocate, appearing for Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate, on behalf of respondents No.4 and 5, on instructions from B.S. Rana, Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Khanna, submits that demarcation can be carried out in the presence of the petitioners if the ex- penses are borne out by them. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to de- posit the amount. Mr. Mittal, further, on instructions from B.S.Rana, submits that an amount of Rs.15,000/- be deposited, in advance, by the petitioners for undertaking the demarcation. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the petitioners will deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/- in the office of the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Khanna, within a period of ten days from today and on de- posit of the same, a notice shall be served upon petitioner No.1, being the representative of all the petitioners and in his/their presence, demarcation shall be carried out.” Subsequent to that fresh demarcation was conducted in the presence of not only the employees of PWD B&R Branch, Revenue Department and Municipal Council but also the petitioners. As per the demarcation report there was encroachment of about 1 to 5 feet in the Bazar. This demarcation report is being sought to be challenged on the ground that no pucca point was placed and in C.W.P. No.22324 of 2010 -3- place of jareeb tape was used. The petitioners have also placed on record the photographs (Annexure P/-9). These photographs reveal that the building line in the Bazar is not straight. Some buildings are ahead while some are behind. Learned Counsel for the petitioners states that as per the record the width of the road was 52 feet. It is in this context that arguments sought to be raised has to be examined. As per the report Annexure P/-3 the center of the road was taken as a pucca point and the distance to the buildings on both the sides was measured. Obviously every building which is less than 26 feet from the center of the road is an encroachment by that measure. On a perusal of the report it appears that some buildings have been shown without any encroachment at all. In this view of the matter, it would not be appropriate for this Court to enter into this tricky question of fact especially when demarcation was done pursuant to the earlier order of this Court. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. ( AJAY TEWARI ) December 15, 2010 JUDGE ashish