C.W.P. No.6232 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 16.09.2008 Smt.Chanchal Kaur and another .....Petitioners versus State of Haryana and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH. HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY. Present : Mr.Rajesh Arora, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Ashish Kapoor, Additional AG, Haryana. -.- UMA NATH SINGH, J. A Coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order on 3.7.2008: “The only dispute is with regard to interest component as to from which date it has to be charged. Mr.Malik says that it is to be charged from 1982. On the other hand, counsel for the petitioners contended that it is from the date when the order was passed i.e. 7.10.1999. In our order dated 19.3.2008, we had made it clear that interest @ 10% be charged from the petitioners from the date they have been using the land in dispute. Mr.Malik says that he will seek instructions from which date the petitioners have been using the land in dispute.” However, till date, there is no compliance of this order and this matter is pending only for resolution of a small issue as regards cut off date for payment of interest @ 10%. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that admittedly, offer in respect of vacant land lying between two houses as being sandwiched C.W.P. No.6232 of 2007 2 was given to him in the year 1985 in terms of State policy that came in force in the year 1984. Petitioners raised constructions over the land after sanction of building plan on 7.10.1989, and thereafter, they have been using that land continuously. Further, petitioners also deposited a sum of Rs.4,61,115/- towards compliance of the demand raised by Authority. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that as per decree in a suit between two brothers, this has come on record that petitioners started using the land even before 1984, probably from 1982. In the writ petition, we are not supposed to go into a disputed question of facts. However, in terms of statement given by Additional Advocate General, Haryana, that a decision would be taken on the basis of record, this writ petition is disposed of, giving such direction to Authority concerned. This writ petition is, thus, disposed of, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, with a direction to Authority concerned to find out the date of using of commencement of use of land by the petitioners, on the basis of record and give necessary details for recording the cut off date. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of. (UMA NATH SINGH) JUDGE 16-09-2008 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) *mohinder JUDGE