IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No.16859 of 2011 in/& CWP No.3350 of 2002 (O&M) Date of Decision : 21.12.2011 Surinder Singh & others ... Petitioners versus District Judge, Rupnagar & others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present : Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. **** M.M.Kumar, J. CM No.16859 of 2011 1. Notice of the application. 2. Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl. AG, Punjab, who is present in court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent. 3. The prayer made in the application is that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court rendered in CWP No.2718 of 2002 decided on 26.11.2011 along with other bunch of petitions. 4. The controversy centres around the issue whether the constitution of Tribunal under Section 60 of the Punjab Town Improvement Trust Act, 1922 (for brevity 'the Act'), for the purposes of determining the compensation of land acquired under that Act would be proper if the President of the Tribunal alone has passed the Award without consolidating the other assessors who are the member of the Tribunal. With the findings recorded by this Court in its order dated 26.11.2011 this Award would not be competent accordingly. The CWP No.3350 of 2002 (O&M) -2- award dated 09.11.2001 passed by the Tribunal was set aside so the same award is subject matter of challenge in the instant petition. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that there is no discrimination between the facts of the present case and that all the one who are decided by the judgment dated 26.11.2011 (Annexure A) annexed with the application. The Award is of the same date and in respect of the same notification. Accordingly, the matter is squarely covered and the writ petition is allowed in the same terms. 6. The petition stands disposed of. (M.M.Kumar) Judge 21.12.2011 (Rajiv Narain Raina) sonia Judge