IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 2194 of 2009 Date of Decision : August 11, 2009 Karam Singh and others. … Petitioners Versus Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh and another. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.S. KHEHAR, HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : Mr. B.R. Rana, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. K.K. Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents. J.S. Khehar, J. (Oral) The claim of the petitioners in the instant writ petition is based on an order dated 14.08.2003 passed by the Lok Adalat of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 13787 of 2000. Relevant extract of the aforesaid order is being extracted hereunder:- “It is agreed that some compensation for the land acquired remains undisbursed because the names of the petitioners do not find mention in the revenue records. They are the legal heirs of the original owner. In that situation, it is agreed that the petitioners would approach the Land Acquisition Collector and on being satisfied that they are the legal heirs of the land CWP No. 2194 of 2009 owner, the compensation lying undisbursed would be disbursed to them according to law.” Based on the aforesaid order, the petitioners moved a representation (Annexure P/6 with appended affidavits) asserting, that they were legal heirs of Karnail Singh son of Harzilla, and that agricultural, as well as, abadi deh land owned by their ancestors was acquired by the respondents, but no compensation was paid, either to their ancestors, or to them, in lieu thereof. We have perused the representation of the petitioners, as well as, the enclosed affidavits. It would be very difficult, on the basis of the factual position depicted therein, to record a concrete finding that the petitioners are the legal heirs / successors of Karnail Singh son of Harzilla. Even the particulars of the agricultural land and abadi deh, allegedly in the ownership of their ancestors, have not been defined or specified for purposes of identification, in the representation submitted by the petitioners, or the affidavits attached thereto. It is, therefore, not possible for us to pass any favourable order on the basis of the representation, as well as the attached affidavits dated 27.11.2006 (collectively placed on the record with the writ petition as Annexure P/6). Learned counsel for the respondents, however, very fairly states that, if the petitioners move an appropriate representation, along with authentic material demonstrating that they are legal heirs of the erstwhile owners of the land, (which has been acquired by the respondents), compensation whereof has not been disbursed, the respondents would be ready and willing to consider the claim of the petitioners in accordance with law. 2 CWP No. 2194 of 2009 In view of the above, one last opportunity is granted to the petitioners to file a representation along with supportive affidavits, and documents giving particulars of the land in the ownership of their predecessor, and also authenticating their status as legal heirs of the erstwhile owners of the land allegedly acquired by the respondents. If the said representation is filed within three months from today, along with certified copy of this order, the respondents shall take a decision thereon, by passing a well reasoned speaking order, within two months from the date of receipt of the said representation. In case, the petitioners are found entitled to any compensation on account of the acquisition of land of their predecessor by the respondents, the respondents shall disburse the same to the petitioners, within one month thereafter. The instant writ petition shall stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Order dasti on payment of usual charges. ( J.S. Khehar ) Judge August 11, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 3