COCP-4791-2024 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204 COCP-4791-2024 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 27.08.2026 DEEPAK KUMAR …. Petitioner Versus VINEET KUMAR AND OTHERS …. Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present: Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Yash Garg, Advocate, for respondents No.1 & 3. Ms. Gurneet Sagoo, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Mr. Rishabh Singla, AAG, Punjab. * * * * DEEPAK MANCHANDA, J (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed for non-compliance of order dated 05.08.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP-18318-2024. 2. A perusal of the compliance report filed by the State shows that in compliance of order dated 05.08.2024 passed in CWP-18318- 2024, speaking orders dated 29.10.2024 and 18.12.2024 (Annexures R-1 & R-2) had already been passed. Admittedly, the said orders have not been challenged by the petitioner. Further, the issue before the Division Bench of this Court was with regard to illegal encroachment on the properties of improvement trust and the petition was disposed on the statement made by learned State counsel that necessary orders, after SANDEEP KUMAR 2026.08.27 19:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment. COCP-4791-2024 (O&M) -2- affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, would be passed as expeditiously as possible. However, there was no specific timeline for passing the order. But the aforesaid speaking orders reveals that the same were passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 3. Faced with this, learned State counsel submits that petitioner may be directed to appear before the concerned respondent within a period of one week and therefore, after hearing the petitioner, a fresh speaking order would be passed. 4. In view of the same, the petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent concerned on 03.09.2026. Thereafter, upon affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the respondents shall pass a fresh speaking order within a period of two weeks. Accordingly, nothing further remains to be adjudicated in the present petition, and the same is disposed of as such. 5. However, in case needful is not done within the stipulated period, the petitioner shall have liberty to move an appropriate application seeking revival of present petition. 6. The pending miscellaneous application, if any, is also disposed of as such. 27.08.2026 ‘Sandeep’ (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable: No SANDEEP KUMAR 2026.08.27 19:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.