CWP No.2827 of 2010
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No.2827 of 2010
Date of decision: 03.08.2011
Balwinder Singh and another
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH
Present: - Mr. S.S. Sodhi, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Vikas Mehsempuri, Advocate, for respondent No.4.
None for respondent No.5.
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?
3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
*****
ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL)
Respondent No.4 in para No.10 of reply has stated as under: –
“That the contents of para No.10 of the writ
petition as stated are wrong and incorrect, hence
denied. Infact, te said land is being leased out on
year to year basis and the same was leased out to
one Mohinder Singh son of Bharpur Singh w.e.f.
24.4.2009 for one year for a sum of Rs.43,700/-
and at present, the same is on lease with one Teja
Singh for one year for a sum of Rs.57,000/- and
the said lease is going to expire in April, 2011.
As ad when the said lease expired, the answering
respondents will take every steps to shift the
Hadda Rori from the existing place to its
proposed site. In case, the lease is cancelled,
further legal complications will arise and it will
also cause financial loss to the lessor as well as
the Gram Panchayat.”
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and State have
fairly stated that respondent No.4 shall make compliance of the
CWP No.2827 of 2010
2
statement made in paragraph No.10 of the reply.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly stated that
present writ petition be disposed of in the light of statement made in
paragraph No.10 of the reply filed by respondent No.4.
Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(Alok Singh)
Judge
August 03, 2011
R.S.