High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/2842/2016disposed of

Satbir Singh And ANR v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2016-02-12Ms. Justice Navita Singh,Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2842 of 2016 Date of Decision: February 12, 2016 Satbir Singh and another ....Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.

--- Present: Mr.Ashwarya Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.-

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) The petitioners are residents of village Dahar, District Panipat. They have questioned the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat of their village and which has been duly approved by the State Government whereunder a chunk of shamlat deh land has been sold to Panipat Cooperative Sugar Mill for setting-up/expansion of the Sugar Mill. Various disputed questions of facts have been raised by the petitioners with regard to illegality and propriety of the resolution on the basis of which the sale transaction took place. Though the factual issues cannot be effectively adjudicated by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction but we find from the record that a representation-cum-complaint has been made by some of the residents of the village, inter-alia, pointing out that the subject land was meant for allotment of 100 square yard plots to those residents of the village who are living below poverty line.

MOHINDER KUMAR 2016.02.15 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.2842 of 2016 [2] We thus dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to call for the records; ascertain the correct facts and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. If the authorities are of the view that the persons living below poverty line are entitled to be rehabilitated, let the possibility of identifying an alternative site etc. be also explored. An appropriate decision in this regard shall be taken within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE February 12, 2016 [RAJ MOHAN SINGH] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2016.02.15 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh