CWP-21719 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT 128 JORA SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: SUVIR SEHGAL 1. nature of mandamus immediate decision on representations dated Annexures P the respondent motor drain 2. resident of village Paddi, Tehsil Dehlon, District Ludhiana on account of revenue record construction areas and there is a risk of flooding. He submits 21719-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of decision: SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Mr. Anmol Hayer, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab. **** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. Instant petition has been filed nature of mandamus inter alia directing respondents No.2 to 5 immediate decision on representations dated Annexures P-1 and P-2, respectively. Another direction has been sought to the respondents to demarcate and commence drain. Mr. Anmol Hayer, Advocate, submits that the petitioner is a resident of village Paddi, Tehsil Dehlon, District Ludhiana on account of non-construction of storm revenue record since 1964-65. Counsel submits that due to the non construction of drain, rainwater accumulates in the areas and there is a risk of flooding. He submits IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-21719-2025 Date of decision:30.07.2025 ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT SUVIR SEHGAL Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab. Instant petition has been filed for issuance of a writ in the directing respondents No.2 to 5 to take immediate decision on representations dated 26.09.2019 and 21.03.2022, 2, respectively. Another direction has been sought to and commence the construction of a storm Advocate, submits that the petitioner is a resident of village Paddi, Tehsil Dehlon, District Ludhiana, who is aggrieved storm water drain, which exists in the . Counsel submits that due to the non , rainwater accumulates in the roads, fields, residential areas and there is a risk of flooding. He submits that petitioner has moved PETITIONER ESPONDENTS issuance of a writ in the to take 26.09.2019 and 21.03.2022, 2, respectively. Another direction has been sought to storm Advocate, submits that the petitioner is a , who is aggrieved , which exists in the . Counsel submits that due to the non- residential petitioner has moved Sheetal 2025.08.06 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CWP-21719 representations, Annexures P taking any action. By referring to Annexure estimate approved, but the drain 3. submission 4. of expenditure it is a covering There is nothing on the record to show the respondent authorities to an intimation sent to the get the land demarcated, he has to deposit the requisite fee. clear whether charges have been water drain known, A Even the revenue record has not been placed on the record. of representations would not entitle the petitioner to invoke the extra of this Court. 5. with no order as to costs. 30.07.2025 sheetal 21719-2025 -2- epresentations, Annexures P-1 and P-2, with the authorities, who are not taking any action. By referring to Annexure estimate of expenditure was prepared and , but the drain has still not been constructed. I have heard counsel for the petitioner submission. Although, it has been asserted by of expenditure has been prepared, but a perusal of Annexure P covering letter enclosing some information There is nothing on the record to show that the the respondent authorities to lay down the rainwater an intimation sent to the petitioner informing him that in case, he wants to get the land demarcated, he has to deposit the requisite fee. clear whether charges have been deposited. water drain exists in the Akas Sajra of the vill Akas Sajra has been withheld and is not Even the revenue record has not been placed on the record. representations, Annexures P-1 and P- would not entitle the petitioner to invoke the extra Court. There is no merit in the petition with no order as to costs. .2025 Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No , with the authorities, who are not taking any action. By referring to Annexures P-3 and P-4, he submits that an and demarcation of the land was constructed. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and considered Although, it has been asserted by the petitioner that an estimate has been prepared, but a perusal of Annexure P-3 shows that some information supplied to the petitioner that there is any proposal mooted lay down the rainwater drain. Annexure P-4 is petitioner informing him that in case, he wants to get the land demarcated, he has to deposit the requisite fee. Again, it is not deposited. Petitioner has asserted that storm of the village, however, for reasons best and is not a part of the writ petition Even the revenue record has not been placed on the record. Mere submission -2, which are stated to be pending, would not entitle the petitioner to invoke the extra-ordinary writ jurisdiction petition, which is dismissed, though (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No , with the authorities, who are not , he submits that an was and considered his timate 3 shows that supplied to the petitioner. mooted by 4 is petitioner informing him that in case, he wants to Again, it is not storm age, however, for reasons best a part of the writ petition. submission , which are stated to be pending, ordinary writ jurisdiction , though Sheetal 2025.08.06 18:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh