IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No.1028 of 2006 Date of Decision:- 21.1.2008 Amritsar Vikas Manch ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.S.S.Behl, Advocate vs. Sh.B.R.Bajaj and another ....Respondent(s) through Mr.V.K.Sandhir, Advocate for No.1. Mr.G.S.Cheema, Sr.DAG, Punjab for No.2. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the 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? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) The details regarding removal of some unauthorized and illegal encroachments made by the Municipal Authorities have been furnished by learned counsel for the respondents and a copy thereof has been handed over to learned counsel for the petitioner also. It further appears that the main obstruction being caused in the normal flow of traffic is due to unauthorized parking of vehicles and/or Rehris etc. against whom an immediate and effective action can primarily be taken by the Traffic Police. Consequently, this petition is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to verify the spot condition in respect of those areas C.O.C.P. No.1028 of 2006 -2- where the alleged encroachments are claimed to have been removed and if it is found that the claim made by the respondents is against the ground realities, the petitioner may firstly send a representation to the Municipal Authorities and to the local police who, in turn, are directed to act upon the same immediately. If the petitioner finds that despite their efforts the Authorities are not inclined to comply with the directions already issued by this Court, liberty is granted to them to file a fresh contempt petition. Disposed of. Rule discharged. January 21, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE