IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.16990 of 2006 Date of Decision: 6.02.2009 Gulshan Sharma and others Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR, CHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr.Padam Kant, Advocate for Mr.Vinod Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioners Ms.Sonu Chahal, DAG Punjab for respondents No.1, 2 and 6 Mr.Vinish Singla, Advocate for respondents No.3 to 5 Jasbir Singh, J. It is case of the petitioners that in property Nos.405 to 424, situated in Hathi Khana, Amritsar, land measuring 4400 sq. yards is the ownership of Central Government. In the year 1984, the official respondents prepared a Scheme, to construct a Corridor (Galiara) around Sri Har Mandir Sahib and the above said area falls in that Scheme. It is further case of the petitioners that most of the land has been occupied by the encroachers in connivance with the government officials. On a complaint made, investigation was conducted, wherein it was found by the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar that the land, in Civil Writ Petition No.16990 of 2006 2 dispute, vests in it and is part of the Galiara Scheme. Despite inter-se communication between officials of various departments, no step was taken to safeguard interest of the government. Compelled under the circumstances, the petitioners have filed this writ petition in public interest with a prayer that directions be issued to the official respondents to preserve the public property by initiating appropriate legal action against the encroachers. It was further prayed that directions be issued to the official respondents to utilize the land for the purpose, it was earmarked. Upon notice, separate replies have been filed by the respondents, wherein it has been stated that the property, in dispute, is in private ownership and was not acquired for the Galiara Scheme. It was further stated that not the property, in dispute, but the adjoining property falls under the Galiara Scheme. To show ownership of the above said property, copies of some sale deeds have also been placed on record. Private respondent Nos.7 to 17, who were impleaded later on, have also filed reply, asserting their claim over the property, in dispute. Counsel for the parties heard. It is primary contention of the petitioners that the private respondents No.7 to 17 have unauthorizedly occupied the public property, which requires that action be initiated against them for removing the encroachment. As against this, it is positive case of the official respondents and also some of the private respondents that property, in dispute, is the ownership of the private respondents. Civil Writ Petition No.16990 of 2006 3 Such like disputed facts cannot be gone into by this Court while exercising its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to move a detailed representation to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, who shall look into the same and decide it by passing a speaking order. If the officer concerned comes to the conclusion that the property, in dispute, is the public property, then he shall initiate process to get possession of the land from the encroachers, as per law. Before passing any order, an opportunity of being heard shall be granted to the private respondents also. Disposed of. (JASBIR SINGH) JUDGE 6.02.2009 (T.S.THAKUR) gk CHIEF JUSTICE