PREM SARUP Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of prohibition and mandamus restraining the respondents from demolishing the shops of the petitioners. All the three petitioners claim to have purchased the shops along with land underneath thereof vide registered sale-deeds executed in their favour on 31.10.1991, 26.02.2000 and 8.9.1997 respectively. According to the petitioners these shops are located on the Chandigarh-Ambala Highway. Location of these shops has been shown in site plan, Annexure P/1 to the writ petition, which shows that these shops are practically abutting the National Highway. The petitioners claim to be owners in possession of these shops and are continuing their business for a considerable time to the knowledge and notice of the respondents and without any objection from them. The petitioners state that the respondents are now giving threats to them that they would demolish their shops as they have encroached upon the land belonging to the Government. It is specifically averred in the petition that the respondents are conducting the demarcation in a manner contrary to law and the instructions issued by the Financial Commissioner. The demarcation was conducted on 28.5.2004 and thereafter the respondents had clearly stated that the shops existing on the Government land would be demolished. A news item in this regard is stated to have appeared in Punjab Kesri dated 28.5.2004, copy of which is annexed to the writ petition as Annexure P/2. Effected from the threats of the respondents, the petitioners have filed this writ petition before this Court.

(2.) THIS writ petition came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court on 8.6.2004 on which date the counsel for the petitioners sought time to place on record some documents.

(3.) WE had heard learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and at the very outset we may notice that in Annexures A/1 to A/5 in the sale-deeds itself it had been stated that a site plan is attached and separate possession of the purchaser is also shown in the map. None of these site plans which is part of the registered document has been placed on record. Furthermore, it is the case of the petitioners themselves that the respondents have effected the demarcation and are threatening to demolish the unauthorised structure of construction on the government land or on the National Highway. The counsel for the petitioners fairly conceded that they have no right to cover the National Highway or the Government land. Their rights are obviously restricted to the land which they have purchased bona fidely. No document has been placed on record to show what portion of their private property is being sought to be interfered and demolished by the respondents. The petition suffers from the defect of vague averments. The petition also lacks bona fides inasmuch as the threat is stated to have been given on 28.5.2004 or prior thereto but till today nothing has happened and no part of the shops owned by the petitioners has been demolished.