CWP No.10611 of 2009 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.10611 of 2009 Date of Order: 18.11.2009 Sukhwinder Singh and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Vikram Bali, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.K. Jain, Addl.A.G, Punjab for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. J.R. Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kashmir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.4. 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR,J Learned counsel for respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat has categorically stated that in the proceedings initiated under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Land Act, 1961, the Gram Panchayat would not rely upon the amended provisions of Section 42-A of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 2007 (for brevity “the Act”) effected through Amendment Act No.6 of 2007 vide Notification dated 23.7.2007. Sh. Atul Lakhanpal, learned senior counsel states that in view of the stand taken by the gram panchayat, the instant writ petition to the extent of challenge to the vires of Section 42-A of the Act has been CWP No.10611 of 2009 #2# rendered infructuous as the gram panchayat-respondent No.4 would not be making use of any of those provisions. In view of the above, writ petition is disposed of having become infructuous. However, it is made clear that respondent No.4 shall remain bound by the statement made at the bar. ( M.M. KUMAR ) JUDGE November 18, 2009 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE