IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 8860 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 13, 2009 AJIT SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MOGA & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr.RS Aulakh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. KS Sidhu, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Navdeep Chhabra, Advocate, for respondent No.3. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing order dated 14.6.2006 (Annexure P-6) whereby order dated 17.5.2005 (Annexure P-5) has been confirmed. The effect of impugned Civil Writ Petition No. 8860 of 2007 2 orders is that the petitioner has been found in unauthorized possession of land belonging to Panchayat Samiti, Dharamkot at Kot Ise Khan, Tehsil and District Moga, and has been directed to be evicted. In brief, two issues have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner; firstly, that the Executive Officer had no right to file the case without resolution of the Panchayat Samiti and; secondly, notice as provided under the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973, has not been issued. On a pointed query of the court, learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to dispute the fact that the Panchayat Samiti indeed is the owner of the land at issue. The findings recorded in the impugned orders are after hearing the petitioner. I find that the orders have been passed after framing of proper issues and allowing the petitioner to lead evidence. No infirmity can be traced in the reasoning adopted. So far as the grounds raised by the petitioner are concerned, they are only hyper technical grounds. Proceedings can be initiated by a person who comes to know of unauthorized possession on public land/premises. So far as the factum of issuance of notice is concerned, I find that the notice was served, as is evident from Annexure P-3. Annexure P- 1 is the application filed under the Act, which gives complete details and boundaries of the land in question. The purpose of giving a notice is to apprise the person in unauthorized possession in regard to the details of land and the claim of the complainant. This having been done, I find no Civil Writ Petition No. 8860 of 2007 3 infirmity in the action of the respondents. No prejudice has been caused to the petitioner. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed. February 13, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE