C.O.C.P. No. 473 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 473 of 2008 Date of Decision : February 17, 2009 Deepinder Singh ....Petitioner Versus Harminder Singh .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Gulshan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.C. Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent. T.P.S. MANN, J. (Oral) On December 21, 2007, while disposing of C.M. No. 21179 of 2007 filed on behalf of the petitioner, this Court had directed that during the pendency of the writ petition, dispossession of the legal representatives of the petitioner therein, shall remain stayed. The present petitioner is legal representative of Kulwant Singh, who had earlier filed aforementioned CWP No. 3462 of 1998. According to the petitioner, despite the aforementioned order passed on 21.12.2007, the respondent not only interfered in the possession of the petitioner, but also lodged FIR No. 19 dated 20.1.2008, Police Station C.O.C.P. No. 473 of 2008 -2- Sadar, Jalandhar, under Sections 379, 447, 506 and 120-B IPC against the petitioner and five others with the allegations that they were taking out the potatoes cultivated in the land. Moreover, the petitioner and others were also proceeded against under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C., and, therefore, appropriate action be taken against the respondent for disobeying the orders passed by this Court on 21.12.2007. Reply has been filed by the respondent. In para 1 of the preliminary submissions, it has been stated that before hearing of C.M. No. 21179 of 2007 on 21.12.2007 by this Court, the possession of the land in question had already been taken from its unauthorized occupants vide Rapat Roznamcha Waqiati No.145 dated 1.12.2007. It was much earlier to the passing of the aforementioned order of stay. Along with reply, copy of Rapat Roznamcha Waqiati No.145 dated 1.12.2007 has been attached. A perusal of the same would show that the possession of the land in question was taken by cultivating the same with the help of two tractors and a JCB machine and at that time there was no opposition by anyone to the taking of possession. Apart from the aforementioned stand of the respondent, learned counsel for the respondent has drawn the attention to the order passed on 21.1.2009 passed by this Court whereby the aforementioned CWP No. 3462 of 1998 was dismissed. In view of the stand taken by the respondent that earlier to the passing of the order of stay regarding dispossession the respondent had also C.O.C.P. No. 473 of 2008 -3- taken the possession on 1.12.2007, there is no merit in the present petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. Rule is discharged. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to pursue the matter with the State Government regarding the allotment/adjustment of the property as per the observations made in the penultimate para of order dated 21.1.2009 passed in CWP No. 3462 of 1998. ( T.P.S. MANN ) February 17, 2009 JUDGE ajay-1