Rajinder Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others

CWP-28461-2023 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28461-2023 Date of Decision: January 15, 2024 Rajinder Singh ......Petitioner

Versus

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

Present:

Mr.Abnash Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.Akshita Chauhan, DAG, Punjab.

Mr.Ashok Kumar Bazaz, Advocate for respondent No.3.

........

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.(ORAL) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for issuance of direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representation, dated 09.12.2023, Annexure P-1. It is also prayed to issue directions to respondents No.1 to 4 not to demolish the house of the petitioner bearing No.220-L, Model Town Ludhiana on the compliant, Annexure P-2. It is also prayed to direct the official respondents not to harass the petitioner and his family on the false and frivolous complaints of the builder Prem Singh Sokhi or any person on his behalf.

Vide order dated 21.12.2023, this Court directed respondent No.2 to file inspection report. In pursuance of the same, inspection report, by way of affidavit of Jagdev Singh Sekhon, Zonal Commissioner, Zone 'D", Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, was filed on 08.01.2024, copy of which has already been supplied to counsel for the petitioner. MEENU 2024.01.18 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-28461-2023 -2In the inspection report, dated 06.01.2024, it is mentioned that the Committee constituted by the Commissioner in compliance to the order of this Court, visited and inspected the building and found it to be 40-45 years old which has not been repaired for a long period resulting into cracks at various places. It has been furhter stated therein that private respondents have been instructed to refrain from undertaking noisy construction activities in between the sun set and the sun rise. They have also been directed to take all safety precautions during construction activities. The private respondents have also been directed to take all safety measures during construction of basement.

The main prayer in the present petition is to direct respondents no.2 to decide the representation, which has already been decided on 29.11.2023 and the order passed thereon has already been supplied to counsel for the petitioner on 21.12.2023.

In view of the above, nothing survives in the present petition and the same is disposed of. However, petitioner is at liberty to avail his remedy as per law in case any grievance accrues to him. January 15, 2024 ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2024.01.18 12:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document