IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.5141 of 2011 Date of decision:26.08.2011. Kanta Devi and another .................Petitioners v. Gram Panchayat Village Aklian .................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present:- Mr.RK Jindal,Advocate for the petitioners Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral) Plaintiffs/petitioners have filed the present revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the orders Annexures P1 and P4 passed by the Courts below, whereby their application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC has been dismissed. In nut shell, it is case of the plaintiffs/petitioners that they have a brick kiln and residential quarters in Village Aklian and the defendant/gram panchayat is now shifting skeleton yard hadda rori to a plot measuring 9 marla which adjoins the said brick kiln. It is further alleged that the hadda rori is already being maintained at two sites- one in land measuring 2 kanals and the other one in land measuring 4 kanals. With these averments the plaintiffs/petitioners filed a suit for permanent injunction alongwith an application under Order 39 Rules 1 CR No.5141 of 2011 2 and 2 CPC. Upon notice, defendant/respondent(Gram Panchayat) filed written statement and reply to the stay application stating therein that it is owner in possession of the suit land. It was stated that neither any labour nor plaintiff no.2 is residing in the quarters alongside the brick kiln. It was further stated that the existing hadda rori in land measuring 2 kanals is surrounded by thickly populated area of the village and for the welfare of the public, now hadda rori is being shifted to the site in dispute. It was also stated that the proposed hadda rori is 5/6 killas away from the land of the plaintiffs/petitioners. After hearing both sides both the courts below dismissed the stay application moved by the plaintiffs/petitioners. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent-Gram Panchayat is riddled with party faction and the panchayat is trying to please Bikkar Singh and Balraj Singh, close associates of the present Sarpanch, who own some property adjoining the site measuring 2 kanals of land which is being used for hadda rori and even the disputed/proposed site for hadda rori measuring 9 marlas of land has been purchased from them. In my opinion, the submission raised on behalf of the plaintiffs/petitioners cannot be gone into at this stage. Both the courts below have found that as per jamabandi, the respondent Gram Panchayat is owner of the suit land and as such it cannot be restrained from using the land more so when it is for the CR No.5141 of 2011 3 welfare of the public at large. It has also been found that the site earlier used for hadda rori is surrounded by abadi, whereas the present site is far from the village. I find no illegality or irregularity in the exercise of discretion used by the courts below. Dismissed. 26.08.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge