IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 8411 of 2008 Date of Decision: 02.03.2009 Shyam Lal Sharma ..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Pawan Kumar Aryan, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Randhir Singh, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana for respondents No.1 to 5 Mr. Ashok Khubber, Advocate for respondents No. 8 and 9. ***** T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral) This petition has been filed in public interest. It prays for a certiorari quashing an order dated 11.09.2006 issued by the Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Authorities, Yamuna Nagar granting permission to respondents No. 3 to 5 to lay a water pipe line along the berm of Radaur- Kharkali State Highway No. VI over a length of 12 feet. A mandamus directing the respondents to refrain from laying any water pipe line or damaging the road in any manner, has also been prayed for. When this petition came up before us on 15.12.2008, learned counsel for the official respondents submitted that although a notice was issued to respondents No. 8 and 9 regarding the unauthorised use of the CWP No. 8411 of 2008 [2] berm of the road for laying of a water pipe by the said respondents, no further action could be taken on the basis of the said notice on account of an interim stay granted by the Civil Court, before whom respondents No. 8 and 9 had filed a civil suit. It was further pointed out that respondents No. 8 and 9 had not taken any permission from the competent authority for laying the pipe in question and if a proper application was made to the said respondents, the competent authority would examine the same and pass appropriate orders after a spot inspection. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 8 and 9 had no objection to the making of an application seeking permission to lay the pipe on such terms and conditions as may be found appropriate by the competent authority. This Court had accordingly permitted respondents No. 8 and 9 to file an appropriate application before the competent authority and to the Executive Engineer of the Division concerned who was then directed to pass an appropriate order on the subject and file a copy of the same before this Court. In pursuance to the said order, an application dated 19.01.2009 does appear to have been made by respondents No. 8 and 9 to the Executive Engineer, Jagadhari Provincial Division, PWD (B&R) Branch, Yamuna Nagar, who has by an order dated 16.02.2009 granted the permission prayed for by the said respondents subject to certain terms and conditions enumerated in the said order. Copy of the order passed by the Executive Engineer has been today produced before us by learned counsel appearing for the Executive Engineer. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 8 and 9 submits that the said respondents are willing to comply with the directions CWP No. 8411 of 2008 [3] contained in the order passed by the Executive Engineer and to shift the pipe line in question to the outer edge of the road mentioned above and to re-lay the same subject to the fulfillment of the conditions stipulated in the order. Learned counsel appearing for the State Government and the Sub Divisional Officer who is also present in person submit that if the water pipe line is re-laid at a depth of 1.20 meters, the same would not cause any damage to the road nor involve any inconvenience or risk to those who are using the same. A reading of the order passed by the Executive Engineer further shows that the Department has reserved its rights to recover from respondents no. 8 and 9 any expenditure that it may incur for repairing any damage that may occur to the road at any stage on account of laying of the pipe. In the circumstances, therefore, and having regard to the fact that the Department has considered the feasibility of laying the pipeline and granted permission to it on the terms stipulated in the order, we see no reason why the present writ petition cannot be disposed of in terms of the said order with a direction that the pipeline already laid shall be shifted by respondents No. 8 and 9 and re-laid subject to the fulfillment of the conditions stipulated in the order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed off with the above directions leaving the parties to bear their own costs. (T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE (HEMANT GUPTA) 02.03.2009 JUDGE 'ravinder'