Civil Writ Petition No. 6812 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. 1. Civil Writ Petition No. 6812 of 2009 Date of Decision: 28.7.2009 Satinder Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others …Respondents AND 2. Civil Writ Petition No. 8046 of 2009 Kashmiri Lal and Another … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Jatinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (In CWP No. 6812 of 2009). Mr. Parminderjeet Singh Khurana, Advocate for the petitioners (In CWP No. 8046 of 2009) Civil Writ Petition No. 6812 of 2009 2 Mr. Randhir Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.1, 2, 7 and 8 (In CWP No. 6812 of 2009) and for respondents No.1 and 2 (In CWP No. 8046 of 2009). Mr. J.S. Toor, Advocate for respondent No.3 (In CWP No. 6812 of 2009 & CWP No. 8046 of 2009). None for respondent No.4 (In CWP No. 6812 of 2009) and for respondents No.5 & 6 (In CWP No. 8046 of 2009) Mr. Atul Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.5 (In CWP No. 6812 of 2009). T.S. Thakur, C.J. (Oral) In these petitions, filed in public interest, the petitioners are challenging the sale of certain property owned by Municipal Committee Fazilka, for discharge of an unpaid debt incurred by the Committee. When the matter came up before us on 1.7.2009, learned counsel appearing for the Committee pointed out that the Committee had arranged a sum of Rs.2,28,57,184/- for liquidating the outstanding liability towards respondent No.4-bank so as to save the property in question from being alienated. He, today, submits that apart from the amount mentioned above an additional amount found due to the bank has also been deposited with the Recovery Officer, who has, by an order dated 15.7.2009, set aside the auction of the property in question. A copy of the said order has been placed on the record. Counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that in the light of subsequent developments mentioned above, these petitions have become infructuous and could be disposed off as such. He further points out that the entire exercise had been manipulated by certain officials in Civil Writ Petition No. 6812 of 2009 3 the Committee in a bid to transfer, in an illegal and fraudulent manner, valuable property of the Committee. The said aspect, according to learned counsel, was investigated by the Senior Superintendent of Police Vigilance, Ferozepur, who has recorded certain conclusions and asked for registration of a case and prosecution of those involved in the episode. They submit that the dismissal of these writ petitions should not prevent the authorities from initiating any proceedings or taking any action, in accordance with law, against the delinquent. We find merit in that submissions. The fact that these petitions have become infructuous on account of subsequent developments referred to above would not prevent any action which the authorities may like to take against any official who may be found to have misused his position in an attempt to benefit any third party or to transfer valuable property of the Municipal Committee in discharge of the debt in question. This would also not prevent the auction purchaser from seeking appropriate redress before the Recovery Officer, in accordance with rules, for payment of any amount otherwise due to him. These petitions are disposed off, with the above observations leaving the parties to bear their own costs. (T.S.Thakur) Chief Justice (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge July 28, 2009 “DK”