CWPNo.24667of2024 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106 CWP No.24667 of 2024 Date of decision: September 3rd, 2026 Suresh .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DIVYA SHARMA Present: Mr. Himanshu Setia, Advocate for Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Prakash Chahar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.5 to 7. VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. In the headnote of the petition, the following prayers have been made: “Civil writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution ofIndiaprayingforissuanceofawritinthenatureofCertiorari for quashing of order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by Ld. District Collector, Bhiwani, whereby, the Ld. District Collector, Bhiwani set aside the order dated 19.12.2023 (AnnexureP-4)passedbyLd.AssistantCollector,Bhiwaniand remand back the matter to the Ld. SDM for reconsideration after fresh demarcation, being wrong, illegal and unjust in the eyesoflaw; AND Issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 & 4 to discharge its legal duty and obligation PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.09.04 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWPNo.24667of2024 2

and initiate proceedings to remove illegal and unauthorized encroachment/constructiononpublicproperty/publicroadand to take appropriate action against private respondents, in the interestofjustice. AND/OR Any other orderor writ direction which this Hon'ble court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly beissued.” 2. Learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that the petitioner had challenged the same order by filing CWP-22949-2024 in which the following order was passed: “1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by learned District Collector, Bhiwani, whereby an order dated 19.12.2023 (Annexure P-4) passed by learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Bhiwani has been set asideandmatterwasremanded. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the instant petition with liberty to avail his remedies against the order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Appellate Authority in accordance with the provisionsofSection13-B ofHaryana VillageCommon Lands (Regulation)Act,1961. 3. Keeping in view the aforesaid submission made by learned counselforthepetitioners,thepresentwritpetitionisdismissed aswithdrawnwiththelibertyaforesaid. 4.Allpendingapplication(s),ifany,shallalsostandclosed. September10,2024”

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has further pointed out PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.09.04 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWPNo.24667of2024 3 paragraph 16 of the writ petition, in which the averment regarding the same has been made, is reproduced hereinbelow: “16. That earlier the petitioner filed CWP-22949 of 2024 before this Hon'ble Court and the same was dismissed as withdrawnvideorderdated10.09.2024.Copyoftheorder dated10.09.2024isattachedasAnnexureP-6.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not be able to show as to how the present second writ petition would be maintainable and has not highlighted the fact as to whether he has availed his remedy against the order dated 02.05.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority in accordance with the provisions of Section 13-B of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 or not. In fact, the order Annexure P-6 was passed on 10.09.2024 and a perusal of the index would show that the present writ petition was drafted on 13.09.2024 i.e. after a period of three days after the passing of the said order. It is not disputed before this Court that the order dated 10.09.2024 has neither been recalled nor any clarification has been sought. The present petition, thus, is absolutely misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE September 3rd, 2026 (DIVYA SHARMA) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No PUNEET SACHDEVA

2026.09.04 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWPNo.24667of2024 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 106 CWP No.24667 of 2024 Date of decision: September 3rd, 2026 Suresh .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DIVYA SHARMA Present: Mr. Himanshu Setia, Advocate for Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Prakash Chahar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.5 to 7. VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. In the headnote of the petition, the following prayers have been made: “Civil writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution ofIndiaprayingforissuanceofawritinthenatureofCertiorari for quashing of order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by Ld. District Collector, Bhiwani, whereby, the Ld. District Collector, Bhiwani set aside the order dated 19.12.2023 (AnnexureP-4)passedbyLd.AssistantCollector,Bhiwaniand remand back the matter to the Ld. SDM for reconsideration after fresh demarcation, being wrong, illegal and unjust in the eyesoflaw; AND Issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.3 & 4 to discharge its legal duty and obligation PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.09.04 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWPNo.24667of2024 2

and initiate proceedings to remove illegal and unauthorized encroachment/constructiononpublicproperty/publicroadand to take appropriate action against private respondents, in the interestofjustice. AND/OR Any other orderor writ direction which this Hon'ble court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly beissued.” 2. Learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that the petitioner had challenged the same order by filing CWP-22949-2024 in which the following order was passed: “1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by learned District Collector, Bhiwani, whereby an order dated 19.12.2023 (Annexure P-4) passed by learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Bhiwani has been set asideandmatterwasremanded. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the instant petition with liberty to avail his remedies against the order dated 02.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Appellate Authority in accordance with the provisionsofSection13-B ofHaryana VillageCommon Lands (Regulation)Act,1961. 3. Keeping in view the aforesaid submission made by learned counselforthepetitioners,thepresentwritpetitionisdismissed aswithdrawnwiththelibertyaforesaid. 4.Allpendingapplication(s),ifany,shallalsostandclosed. September10,2024”

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has further pointed out PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.09.04 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWPNo.24667of2024 3 paragraph 16 of the writ petition, in which the averment regarding the same has been made, is reproduced hereinbelow: “16. That earlier the petitioner filed CWP-22949 of 2024 before this Hon'ble Court and the same was dismissed as withdrawnvideorderdated10.09.2024.Copyoftheorder dated10.09.2024isattachedasAnnexureP-6.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not be able to show as to how the present second writ petition would be maintainable and has not highlighted the fact as to whether he has availed his remedy against the order dated 02.05.2024 passed by the Appellate Authority in accordance with the provisions of Section 13-B of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 or not. In fact, the order Annexure P-6 was passed on 10.09.2024 and a perusal of the index would show that the present writ petition was drafted on 13.09.2024 i.e. after a period of three days after the passing of the said order. It is not disputed before this Court that the order dated 10.09.2024 has neither been recalled nor any clarification has been sought. The present petition, thus, is absolutely misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE September 3rd, 2026 (DIVYA SHARMA) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No PUNEET SACHDEVA

2026.09.04 14:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh