CWP-12446-2025 106 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT INDERJIT BHANDARI @ INDERJIT RAI JOINT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER (IRD), AND OTHERS CORAM : HON’BLE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present : Mr. Jatinder Singla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. DEEPAK SIBAL On 13.07.2018, respondents No.5 and 6 respondent No.2 Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973 (for short the 1973 Act) seeking therein the eviction of the petitioner fro marlas which was 2. On being 3. Through respondents No.5 from the land in question. In Novem order passed by respondent No.2 under Section interim stay was also filed the Appelalte Authority 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12446-2025 DATE OF DECISION : INDERJIT BHANDARI @ INDERJIT RAI Versus JOINT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER (IRD), AND OTHERS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Jatinder Singla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. DEEPAK SIBAL, J.(ORAL) On 13.07.2018, respondents No.5 and 6 respondent No.2 under Sections 5 and 7 of the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973 (for short the 1973 Act) seeking therein the eviction of the petitioner fro which was duly described in the petition. On being put to notice, the petitioner Through order dated 13.09.2019, respondents No.5 and 6’s petition, requiring the petit from the land in question. In November 2019, passed by respondent No.2 dated 13.09.2019 through an appeal filed Section 9 of the 1973 Act. Along with was also filed by the petitioner. The Commissioner the Appelalte Authority, issued notice in the petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 2025 DATE OF DECISION : 03.05.2025 …PETITIONER JOINT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER (IRD), AND OTHERS …RESPONDENTS MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Jatinder Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. On 13.07.2018, respondents No.5 and 6 filed a petition before under Sections 5 and 7 of the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973 (for short the 1973 Act) seeking therein the eviction of the petitioner from the land measuring 10 duly described in the petition. , the petitioner contested the petition. rder dated 13.09.2019, respondent No.2 allowed , requiring the petitioner to be evicted , the petitioner challenged the dated 13.09.2019 through an appeal filed 9 of the 1973 Act. Along with his appeal, an application for . The Commissioner, who was issued notice in the petitioner’s appeal as also his PRINCE SAINI 2025.05.10 02:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12446-2025 application for interim stay parties to maintain question. The petitioner’s Commissioner disposal of his appeal. 4. Learned State counsel objection to the acceptance of the afore prayer m petitioner seeking early disposal of Commissioner to challenge therein the order of the Collector dated 13.09.2019. 5. Learne 6. The petitioner passed by respondent No.2 about five and half years. Thus, its by the Commissioner. 7. In the light of the above and because e to a speedy disposal of the and that a direction to adjudicate upon a none. Rather, a direction issued to decide a at an early stage is in the interest of both the parties writ petition is disposed of wit Development Commi Department, SAS Nagar petitioner under Section of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law 2025 application for interim stay. In the meantime, parties to maintain status quo with regard to possession over the l question. The petitioner’s appeal is still stated to be pending before the Commissioner. Through the instant petition the petitioner seek disposal of his appeal. Learned State counsel who appears on objection to the acceptance of the afore prayer m seeking early disposal of the appeal filed by him before the Commissioner to challenge therein the order of the Collector dated Learned counsel for the parties have been heard. The petitioner’s appeal, filed by him to challenge therein order passed by respondent No.2, is pending before the Commissioner about five and half years. Thus, its disposal has by the Commissioner. In the light of the above and because e to a speedy disposal of the lis initiated by him direction to adjudicate upon a lis ather, a direction issued to decide a lis an early stage is in the interest of both the parties petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 Development Commissioner (IRD), Rural Development and Panchayat Department, SAS Nagar to finally dispose of the petitioner under Section 9 of the 1973 Act within 0 receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law n the meantime, directions were issued to the with regard to possession over the land in appeal is still stated to be pending before the petition the petitioner seeks early who appears on advance notice has no objection to the acceptance of the afore prayer made on behalf of the appeal filed by him before the Commissioner to challenge therein the order of the Collector dated d counsel for the parties have been heard. , filed by him to challenge therein order is pending before the Commissioner for the last disposal has been unnecessarily delayed In the light of the above and because every litigant has a right initiated by him-her/pending against him/her expeditiously also prejudices lis pending between the parties an early stage is in the interest of both the parties to the lis, the present h a direction to respondent No.1-Joint ssioner (IRD), Rural Development and Panchayat to finally dispose of the appeal filed by the Act within 02 months from the date receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law. PRINCE SAINI 2025.05.10 02:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12446-2025 8. Till the disposa interim order already granted by the Commissioner on 08.01.2020, quo with regard to possession over the land in question shall 03.05.2025 Prince Whether speaking/reasoned : Whether reportable : 2025 Till the disposal of the petitioner’s appeal, in interim order already granted by the Commissioner on 08.01.2020, with regard to possession over the land in question shall (LAPITA BANERJI) hether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No l of the petitioner’s appeal, in terms of the interim order already granted by the Commissioner on 08.01.2020, status with regard to possession over the land in question shall be maintained. (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE PRINCE SAINI 2025.05.10 02:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document