Roshan Lal And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS.

IOIN-CWP-3629-1994 in CWP-3629-1994 -1HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IOIN-CWP-3629-1994 in CWP-3629-1994 Date of Decision: September 06, 2017 Roshan Lal and others .....Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR MITTAL 1.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

Yes/No 2.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No.

3.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No .......

Present:

Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.Vishal Garg, Addl.AG, Haryana.

........

SURYA KANT, J.

Learned State counsel submits that no recovery in terms of the order dated 07.01.2016 could be effected from the writ petitioners beyond Rs.40,000/- for the reason that they do not own any immovable property in the village and have a very small residential house which is the only dwelling unit owned by petitioner No.1.

Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 (Kala Ram and Krishan) have already passed away and only Roshan Lalpetitioner No.1 survives, who does not own any immovable property in the village.

Meenu 2017.09.11 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

IOIN-CWP-3629-1994 in CWP-3629-1994 -2It appears that petitioner No.1 is living below poverty line. In view of the admitted stand taken before us, we modify the order dated 07.01.2016 and delete the direction whereby the district Administration was directed to assist the Gram Panchayat to recover the mesne profits as arrears of land revenue. The amount already recovered, however, shall be appropriated by the Gram Panchayat.

( SURYA KANT ) JUDGE September 06, 2017 ( SUDHIR MITTAL ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No Meenu 2017.09.11 12:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh