IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP NO. 5026 OF 2007 DECIDED ON : 06.03.2009 Naranjan Singh ...Petitioner versus The Amritsar Improvement Trust and another ...Respondents A N D CWP NO. 12925 OF 2008 Basant Singh and others ...Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents 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 ? Present : Mr. G. S. Bajwa, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Meenakshi Dogra, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. G. S. Attariwala, Additional AG, Punjab, for respondent No.2. SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 12925 of 2008 and No.5026 of 2007, as common question of law and facts are involved in these cases. For brevity, the facts are being taken from CWP NO. 5026 of 2007. The petitioner seeks a direction for allotment of plot measuring 500 sq. yards under the category of 'displaced persons' in the Ajnala Road Extension Scheme floated by the Improvement Trust, Amritsar. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, reply-affidavit has been filed by the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that his claim is securely answered in his favour by a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated May 08, 2006 passed in LPA No. 751 of 1992 (Sushma Palta and others vs. State of Punjab and others). Learned counsel for the respondent-Trust, on the other hand, points out that they have already challenged the judgment of this Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and ad-interim stay has been granted in their favour. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondent- Trust to consider the claim of the petitioners in the light of Division Bench judgment of this Court dated May 08, 2006 in Sushma Palta's case (supra). However, if the respondents arrive at the conclusion that the petitioners' claim is covered by the said judgment, they need not to implement such a decision till the matter is decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is further directed that the consequential relief, if any flowing from the final judgment, shall be granted to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of delivery of the judgment by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Disposed of. MARCH 06, 2009 (SURYA KANT) shalini JUDGE