IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.18945 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 23rd December, 2010. Gurdev Singh & Anr. Petitioners through Mr. J.V.Yadav, Advocate Versus Advisor to the Administrator & Ors. Respondents through Mr. Vikas Cuccria, Advocate. 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] In compliance to the order dated 15.10.2010 passed by this Court, the respondents have submitted an Inspection Report which reads as follows:- “1. Door shutter has been locked in between main shop to rear open courtyard and door rolling shutter in rear end wall towards house has been sealed, as such rear open courtyard could not be checked. 2. Main shop in front is free from violations” Learned counsel for the petitioners states that an eviction order has already been passed against the tenants who had caused the reported violations in the main portion and as soon as the possession is taken over by the petitioners, these violations shall also be removed. In this view of the matter, the impugned resumption orders dated 02.09.2005, 24.08.2006 and 07.02.2007 [Annexures P1 to P-3] are set aside, however, with a direction to the petitioners to give an undertaking to the respondents to remove the violations from the main portion of the shop in a time-bound manner as well as not to commit any violation in future in the rear open courtyard, the possession whereof has already been taken by the petitioners from the tenants. The resumption orders shall stand set aside subject to the afore-stated undertaking only. Disposed of. Dasti. December 23, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE