CWP No.21778 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CWP No.21778 of 2008 Date of decision : 29.3.2011 Bhag Ram and another ........Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and others .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present:- Mr. Sarjit Singh, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr.Anil Kumar Sharma, Addl.AG, Punjab Mr.P.C.Suman, Advocate, for Objector Joginder Walia --- AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) : On 24.12.2008 while disposing of the petition, the following order (effective portion) was passed - "In view of the above, we consider it just and appropriate to dispose of the instant writ petition by directing the respondents to demarcate the land in question under the supervision and control of Ms. Aman Sibia, Advocate, as well as, the Naib Tehsildar of the area. The demarcation shall be carried out on 29.12.2008. Due intimation in this behalf shall be communicated to the respondents, as well as all interested parties, by the learned counsel representing the respondents. The demarcation shall be effected on 29.12.2008 at 11.30 AM onwards. After the demarcation is made, one week shall be allowed to the petitioners to remove the encroachments on their own, failing which the encroachments shall be removed by the respondents. A copy of the instant order, as well as, copy of the instant CWP No.21778 of 2008 -2- writ petition shall be furnished to the Local Commissioner. The petitioners shall make adequate arrangements for the Local Commissioner, and pay her a fee of ` 21,000/- including out of pocket expenses. Disposed of accordingly." CM No.5130 of 2009 was filed by the respondent-State for recalling order dated 24.12.2008 on the ground that the demarcation was not conducted as required. The Revenue officials or officers of the State were not present at the spot. Middle point of the road could not be taken and therefore, the encroachments still exists. Considered, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court passed the following order on 29.5.2009 - "We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We are satisfied, that the Local Commissioner deputed by us vide our order dated 24.12.2008, was not appropriately assisted when she visited the revenue estate of village Rahimpur in connection with the encroachments over the Phagwara- Hoshiarpur road. In the peculiar circumstances of this case, learned counsel for the parties are agreed, that the Local Commissioner should be again deputed to carry out the exercise once again. Learned counsel for the parties further state that on this occasion she will be appropriately assisted. In view of the above, Ms. Aman Sibia, Advocate, is requested to visit the revenue estate of village Rahimpur to demarcate the alleged encroachments over the Phagwara- Hoshiarpur road on 4.7.2009. The terms of appointment of the Local Commissioner would be the same as per order dated 24.12.2008, with the only exception that on this occasion the arrangments shall be made and the emoluments shall be paid by the State Government. Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, shall ensure the availability of the relevant revenue record and senior CWP No.21778 of 2008 -3- revenue officer at the time of demarcation to be carried out by the Local Commissioner. List the main case for further consideration on 7.8.2009. Copy of this order be furnished to the learned counsel for the parties, as well as, to the Local Commissioner under the signatures of the Reader attached to this Court." Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State contends that in accordance with the undertaking given by the petitioners, the encroachments have not been removed even till date. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that there are 48 persons who have encroached on the Government land/road and therefore, action against those persons needs to be taken. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. As per the second demarcation report furnished by the Local Commissioner, the petitioners have been found to be in encroachments of land abutting the road. As per the undertaking given by the petitioners, as recorded in order dated 28.12.2008, after the demarcation is made, within one week, the petitioners were required to remove encroachments of their own, failing which encroachments were required to be removed by the official respondents. Considered, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in tune with orders passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 24.12.2008 and on 29.5.2009, the respondents are at liberty to remove the encroachments. Petition disposed of. (AJAI LAMBA) JUDGE 29.3.2011 akm