COCP-1179 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 112 Dheer Singh Sh. Narender Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. violation of order dated Division Bench of this Court vs. State of therein was directed to decide the by the petitioner by passing a speaking order by affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned preferably within 02 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 2. petition seeking issuance of appropriate direction in the nature of Mandamus as well as un No. 7 to 22 property as described in the writ petition. 1179-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP Date of Decision: Dheer Singh Versus Sh. Narender Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Rajesh Kumar Bhagal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl.A.G., Haryana. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The present contempt petition has been filed violation of order dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure P Division Bench of this Court in CWP-7997 State of Haryana and others’, whereby the official respondent No. 3 therein was directed to decide the representation dated 23.04.2024 moved by the petitioner by passing a speaking order by affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned preferably within 02 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Briefly stated, the petitioner had filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking issuance of appropriate direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the official respondents to get remove encroachment as well as un-authorized possession/construction raised by the respondents No. 7 to 22 (in the writ petition) over the public/Panchayat land of the property as described in the writ petition. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-1179-2026 Date of Decision: 21.05.2026 .…Petitioner .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Rajesh Kumar Bhagal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl.A.G., Haryana. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging (Annexure P-1) passed by the 7997-2025, titled as ‘Dheer Singh , whereby the official respondent No. 3 representation dated 23.04.2024 moved by the petitioner by passing a speaking order by affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned preferably within 02 months from the date of r had filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking issuance of appropriate direction in the nature of directing the official respondents to get remove encroachment uction raised by the respondents over the public/Panchayat land of the alleging , whereby the official respondent No. 3 representation dated 23.04.2024 moved by the petitioner by passing a speaking order by affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned preferably within 02 months from the date of r had filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking issuance of appropriate direction in the nature of directing the official respondents to get remove encroachment uction raised by the respondents over the public/Panchayat land of the RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.26 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-1179 3. dated 23.04.2024 submitted by the petitioner date. 4. respondent has informed and similar Magistrate, Jagadhari. However, the petitioner has not Jagadhari as necessary party in the present case that several encroachers have been authorized by the Government as per Policy and the remaining encroachers are to be removed, in accordance with law. 5. aforesaid submissions of lea 6. 7. to be passed in the present petition and same 8. 9. 21.05.2026 rishu 1179-2026 -2- Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that representation 23.04.2024 submitted by the petitioner At the very outset on instructions, learned counsel for the respondent has informed that the representation(s) filed by the petitioner similar other persons has to be decided by the Magistrate, Jagadhari. However, the petitioner has not Jagadhari as necessary party in the present case several encroachers have been authorized by the Government as per Policy and the remaining encroachers are to be removed, in accordance Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the respondent Heard. In view of the afore-noted facts, no further order is required to be passed in the present petition and same Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 21.05.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that representation 23.04.2024 submitted by the petitioner has not been decided till At the very outset on instructions, learned counsel for the presentation(s) filed by the petitioner has to be decided by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jagadhari. However, the petitioner has not impleaded SDM, Jagadhari as necessary party in the present case. It is further submitted several encroachers have been authorized by the Government as per Policy and the remaining encroachers are to be removed, in accordance sel for the petitioner is unable to dispute the ned counsel for the respondent-State. noted facts, no further order is required to be passed in the present petition and same stands dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Yes/No has not been decided till At the very outset on instructions, learned counsel for the presentation(s) filed by the petitioner Sub Divisional impleaded SDM, . It is further submitted several encroachers have been authorized by the Government as per Policy and the remaining encroachers are to be removed, in accordance sel for the petitioner is unable to dispute the noted facts, no further order is required RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.26 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.