IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA BHAG SINGH AND ANOTHER STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CORAM: Present : HARSH BUNGER, J. [ORAL] of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus allotment of promised area adjoining his industria Abadi GT Road, Village Giaspura, District Ludhiana and/or to make the payment of adequate compensation for the loss of land value due to passing of high tension electricity wires over his industrial plot. 2. plot measuring 1108½ sq. yards, situated on Abadi GT Road, Opposite Ralson Cycle Industries, Giaspura, District Ludhiana from one Vinod Kumar son of Dharam Nath on the basis of a IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH BHAG SINGH AND ANOTHER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Mr. Gurvarandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Navneet Singh, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. HARSH BUNGER, J. [ORAL] Prayer in the present writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of for directing respondent No.4 to compensate the petitioner by allotment of promised area adjoining his industria Abadi GT Road, Village Giaspura, District Ludhiana and/or to make the payment of adequate compensation for the loss of land value due to passing of high tension electricity wires over his industrial plot. Briefly, petitioners claim to be the purchasers of an industrial plot measuring 1108½ sq. yards, situated on Abadi GT Road, Opposite Ralson Cycle Industries, Giaspura, District Ludhiana from one Vinod Kumar son of Dharam Nath on the basis of a IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-8943-2025 (O&M) Date of decision :22.04.2025 …Petitioners …Respondents JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Mr. Gurvarandeep Singh, Advocate Mr. Navneet Singh, Sr. D.A.G., Punjab. Prayer in the present writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of for directing respondent No.4 to compensate the petitioner by allotment of promised area adjoining his industrial plot situated at Abadi GT Road, Village Giaspura, District Ludhiana and/or to make the payment of adequate compensation for the loss of land value due to passing of high tension electricity wires over his industrial plot. itioners claim to be the purchasers of an industrial plot measuring 1108½ sq. yards, situated on Abadi GT Road, Opposite Ralson Cycle Industries, Giaspura, District Ludhiana from one Vinod Kumar son of Dharam Nath on the basis of an agreement to sell 3 2025 (O&M) Date of decision :22.04.2025 Prayer in the present writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of for directing respondent No.4 to compensate the petitioner by l plot situated at Abadi GT Road, Village Giaspura, District Ludhiana and/or to make the payment of adequate compensation for the loss of land value due to passing itioners claim to be the purchasers of an industrial plot measuring 1108½ sq. yards, situated on Abadi GT Road, Opposite Ralson Cycle Industries, Giaspura, District Ludhiana from one n agreement to sell GURPREET KAUR 2025.04.24 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh dated 24.12.1984 (Annexure P-1) and the sale deed dated 03.09.2007 (Annexure P-5). It is stated that on the basis of the said agreement (Annexure P-1), the instalments of the afore-said plot were paid by the petitioners. 2.1 It is averred that Sh. Vinod Kumar (vendor of the petitioners) had inspected the afore-said plot at the time of its purchase and he had found out that certain telephone wires were passing over the said plot whereupon, he filed a civil suit. It is stated that subsequently, the Punjab State Electricity Board, also started installing poles and laying high tension electricity wires across the afore-said property and on that account, its significant portion of the above-referred industrial plot got wasted and un-usable, which led to a dispute and the petitioner No.1-Bhag Singh filed a suit for injunction against the Electricity Board wherein, the learned Civil Court directed the parties to maintain status quo vide an order dated 18.11.1987 (Annexure P-7). 2.2 It is the case of the petitioners that during the pendency of the afore-said civil suit, the respondents herein gave an undertaking to compensate the petitioner by allotting the adjoining green belt area to him on nominal rate as compensation for the loss of land and that the petitioners had deposited an amount of Rs.1,88,000/- in excess than the cost of the plot in the year 2004. It is stated that despite the undertaking furnished by the respondents, no steps have been taken to transfer or allot the area in favour of the petitioner, which has caused him severe loss and mental agony. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed for seeking relief/s, as noticed here-in-above. 3. During the course of hearing of this petition, a pointed query was raised to the learned counsel for the petitioners to show any GURPREET KAUR 2025.04.24 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh undertaking/document in support of the claim put forth by the petitioners as regards allotment of adjoining green belt area to the petitioners at the nominal rate; however, the learned counsel for the petitioners has failed to refer to any such document(s)/undertaking. 3.1 In fact, in para No.14 of the writ petition, the following averment has been made :- “14. That unfortunately, the petitioners have misplaced the final order/Judgment and important case record of both the court cases. The petitioners obtained some of the record from their Trial Court Counsel. However, the petitioners tried their level best to obtain the copies of the plaint, written statement and final orders from the Ld. Court at Ludhiana but being old case the record could not be located. The official informed that old record may have been destroyed and the same is not available. The petitioner is hopeful that the record of the case is maintained by the respondents.” 4. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, especially in the absence of any undertaking/document indicating that the respondents had promised to allot any area to the petitioners, no relief can be granted much less considered in the present proceedings. That apart, even as per petitioners’ own pleaded case, they had allegedly made some payment in the year 2004 towards the cost of the plot and considering the same, the filing of the present petition in the year 2025, has to be taken as barred by gross delay and laches. 5. All pending application/s, if any, shall also stand closed. April 22, 2025 (HARSH BUNGER) gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No GURPREET KAUR 2025.04.24 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh