CWP-11933-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.107 CWP-11933-2026 Date of Decision: 07.07.2026 Pankaj Periwal .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Mohit Uppal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Arora, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Abhimanyu Jairath, Advocate, for the intervenor – Julaisri Devi. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL) The petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the petitioner’s representation dated 03.01.2021, Annexure P-3, and also the applications/representations dated 16.06.2023 and 20.06.2023, Annexure P-8, which pertain to allegations regarding illegal encroachment upon a plot of land owned by him. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner’s father was declared purchaser of property by public auction held on 31.03.1994, viz., plot no.8 measuring 150 square yards out of khasra no.15/6, V. Taraf Karabara – 161 Baladurkey Road, Ludhiana. A certificate of sale of immovable property to that effect was issued by Tax Recovery Officer, Ludhiana, dated 25.11.1994, Annexure P-1. He died on 23.09.2002, and the petitioner became owner of the plot. It is alleged that during Covid- 19 pandemic the plot was encroached upon by certain persons and, in fact, it was sold by one Vidyawanti through General Power of Attorney holder MANINDER 2026.07.09 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-11933-2026 2 Davinder Singh in favour of Julaisri Devi, vide sale deed dated 17.02.2020, Annexure P-4. This is a fraudulent transaction as the said lady has given an affidavit dated 30.03.2021, Annexure P-5, that the plot in question does not belong to her. 3. Learned State counsel has filed an affidavit of Mr. Kikar Singh, PPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police (North), Ludhiana, dated 06.07.2026, which is retained on the case file as Annexure ‘A’. Referring to the same, he submits that an ASI was deputed to ascertain factual position on site. He found that some other person is owner-in-possession of the plot in question and has raised construction over it as well. These facts have been mentioned in para 3 of the affidavit, which reads as under: 3. That in compliance with the above noted order of this Hon’ble Court, it is respectfully submitted that ASI Balkar Singh of P.S. Jodhewal, Ludhiana was deputed to know the factual and legal position at the property and also if the petitioner could be delivered possession of the property as was advised by this Hon’ble Court. Accordingly the said ASI Balkar Singh visited the property and joined the opposite party of the petitioner namely Julaisri Devi in inquiry during which she stated that she had purchased the plot in question from Davinder Singh vide Sale Deed dated 17.02.2020 (Annexure P-4). The said sale deed is not a forged document. The possession of the said plot was delivered to her by the said vendor in the year 1999 and thereafter the said Julaisri Devi raised construction over the said 2021, installed electricity meter in her name and now she alongwith her family members is residing in the property. Therefore, possession of the said property could not be delivered to the petitioner as was advised by this Hon’ble Court. A copy of the said statement of Julaisri Devi is annexed hereto as Annexure R-1/T. 4. Heard. MANINDER 2026.07.09 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment CWP-11933-2026 3 5. In view of the facts brought on record, as referred to above, no direction is required to be issued by this Court regarding applications/representations statedly submitted by the petitioner with regard to alleged encroachment over the plot in question. Although the receipt of any such representation has been denied by the respondent in the affidavit, nevertheless an inquiry has already been conducted, as aforementioned, to ascertain the facts and it has been found that Julaisri Devi is in possession over the plot in question, where she has raised construction as well. 6. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies in accordance with law regarding possession of the plot in question. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 07.07.2026 Maninder Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MANINDER 2026.07.09 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment