Jagdeep Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

CWP-25310-2021 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-25310-2021 Date of Decision: November 07, 2023 Jagdeep Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:

Mr.Sanjay Majithia, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Shalender Sharma, Advocate, Mr.Sumit Sinha and Mr.Rishab Wadhera, Advocates for the petitioner.

Ms.Akshita Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab with Mr.Harsimran Singh, Tehsildar, Dera Baba Nanak. Mr.T.S.Sidhu, Advocate for respondent No.6.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for issuance of directions to the respondents to correctly demarcate his land. It is further prayed to restrain the respondents from interfering in the possession of the petitioner over the land during pendency of the present petition. It has been contended by the petitioner, who is present in person and his counsel that the petitioner had never been heard by the respondents and thus demarcation has not been done.

This Court, vide order dated 12.10.2023, summoned the concerned Tehsildar. In compliance to the same, Mr.Harsimaran Singh, Tehsildar, Dera Baba Nanakm was present in person on 20.10.2023 and he was directed to carry out the necessary action for demarcation by associating MEENU 2023.11.08 12:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

CWP-25310-2021 -2the petitioner at the earliest.

Learned State counsel has filed the status report by way of affidavit of Harsimran Singh, Tehsildar, Dera Baba Nanak, District Gurdaspur, on behalf of respondent No.4. The same is taken on record. It has been submitted that demarcation, as prayed by the petitioner, has been conducted in his presence and the detailed report has already been submitted before this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has raised objection to the same.

After hearing the parties, it is apparent that grievance raised by the petitioner was regarding demarcation of his land, which has been conducted by the respondents/State. However, if the petitioner has any grievance against demarcation, he is at liberty to pursue his remedy in accordance with law.

Disposed of.

November 07, 2023 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2023.11.08 12:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment