HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *** Balwant Singh Versus State of Punjab and others. *** CWP No.3324 of 2008. *** Present: Ms.Rajvinder Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Amol Rattan Singh, Addl: A.G. with Ms. Sonu Chahal, DAG, Punjab. Shri S.S.Salar, Advocate, for respondents No. 4 to 6. *** T.S.Thakur, CJ (Oral) This petition has been filed in Public Interest. It prays for a mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to get the encroachments made by respondents No. 4 to 6 removed from a piece of land situate in Village Balad Kalan, Tehsil and District Sangrur. In response to a notice of motion issued by this Court, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Sangrur had filed an affidavit inter alia stating that respondent No.3 had not received any complaint regarding any dispute over the land in question nor was any breach of peace reported in respect of the same. On 1.10.2008, when this petition came up for hearing before us, Ms. Madhu Dayal, Additional A.G. Punjab, appearing for respondents No. 1 to 3 submitted on instructions of Sub Inspector of Police from Police Station Bhawanigarh that possession of the property in question had already been taken by the Naib Tehsildar,Bhawanigarh who had put lock on the gate and is now was in peaceful possession of the same. The affidavit filed by respondent No.3 however was silent regarding the alleged taking over of possession by the Naib Tehsildar. At the request of Ms. Dayal, we had granted a week's time to file the affidavit of District Collector, Sangrur stating therein whether or not possession of the land had been taken over by the State Government and if the Government was willing to protect the same against any un- authorized encroachment / occupation in future. The District Collector, Sangrur, pursuant to the said order, has filed an affidavit stating that in terms of a letter dated April 22, 2008 he had directed the -2- CWP No.3324 of 2008. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sangrur to remove the encroachments from the property detailed in para No.1 of the affidavit and that the S.D.M. had pursuant to the said directions submitted a report dated September 23, 2008 to the effect that the possession of the property in question had been taken over by the State of Punjab through Naib Tehsildar. The affidavit goes on to state that the State of Punjab is at present in possession of the property in question and that the encroachments made have been removed. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 4 to 6 today argues that the writ petition has been filed with mala fide intentions in as much as the petitioner and two others who owned properties in the vicinity of the land in question have a personal interest in preventing the use and maintenance of the area in question by respondents No. 4 to 6. He submitted, on the basis of a joint statement allegedly recorded by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sangrur on November 21, 2007 that the petitioner was one of those who was allegedly using the land in question for making cow dung cakes and for storing waste. The present writ petition was not, therefore, in public interest He further stated that although the possession of the land has been taken over by the Naib Tehsildar on behalf of the District Administration, the petitioner and others who are eyeing the land are likely to start dumping garbage and making un- authorized use of the same. He submitted that the authorities may be directed to permit respondents No. 4 to 6 to maintain and use the area in question as licensees which will not only prevent the garbage accumulation over the said area but also prevent illegal encroachment by any other person. It was further argued that respondents No. 4 to6 have no personal interest in the property in question and that the boundary wall as also the gate has been put by the “Naujawan Sports and Sabhayacharak Club” of Harditpura which is a voluntary organization. -3- CWP No.3324 of 2008. The material facts are not in dispute. That land in question belong to the State Government is not denied before us by any one. Construction of a boundary wall around the said land by the Club mentioned above is also not in dispute. That possession of the land has been taken over and a lock put on the gate is also not denied. In the circumstances, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition as the property stands restored to the rightful owner. The question whether or not the land in question could be allowed to be used by the Club for its activities on licence basis is a matter on which we do not propose to express any opinion in the present proceedings. The proper course in our view is to leave the use of the land to be determined by the Government or by the District Administration, as the case may be. If the Government considers it fit to allow the use of the land by the Club on such terms as may be deemed fit, it shall be free to make such an arrangement. All that we need say is that till such time, the government decides to put the land in question to any use, the District Administration shall ensure that there is no encroachment on the land either by the petitioner or any one else. The authorities shall also take suitable action permissible in law against any one attempting to trespass or encroach upon the land. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. (T.S.Thakur) Chief Justice (Jasbir Singh) Judge November 14, 2008. Malik