Ramesh Lal v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.25439 of 2015 Date of Decision: December 05, 2015 Ramesh Lal ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

--- Present: Mr.Sandeep Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, Additional AG, Punjab.

-.-

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion.

On our asking, Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

Let four copies of the writ petition be supplied to the State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution. In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage.

The petitioner's case is that at the time of consolidation land measuring 52 kanal 2 marla was allotted to him in lieu of old khasra numbers but the revenue officials, allegedly in connivance with each other, made entries in MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.12.09 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.25439 of 2015 [2] respect of land measuring 29 kanal 7 marla only. The petitioner thereafter has been running from pillar to post for correction of the revenue record so as to get incorporated the entries of his entire land. It further appears from the documents placed on record that the authorities did entertain the petitioner's representation and the Consolidation Officer, Roopnagar asked the revenue authorities to remain present at the spot on 29.05.2015 for demarcation. According to the petitioner, no demarcation took place on 29.05.2015 or thereafter.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of relief sought in this petition but without expressing any views on merits of the petitioner's claim, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent Nos.3 & 4 to consider the above mentioned grievance of the petitioner and redress the same in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE December 05, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.12.09 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh