Mr. K. Kannan, J. (Oral):-

I. The location of petitioners’ construction

1. The writ petition is filed at the instance of persons in possession of a building adjoining a historical place known as Ram Tirath within District Amritsar. The petitioners’ contention was that the predecessors of the petitioners were residing near the temple and the place where they were residing is known as Abadi Ram Tirath. The pucca construction had been made for the residents to maintain their families. The petitioners would identify the construction as having been built in Khasra No.80 measuring 18 kanals 18 marlas and in the jamabandi it is shown that the petitioners were in possession of land bearing Khasra No.79-80.

II. The immediate cause for the lis

2. The cause of action for the writ petition was an incident that had taken place on 19.2.2000 when the Sub Divisional Magistrate the respondent No.3 herein, allegedly wanted to take some money from the petitioners out of the collection made by them from the followers and also some money from the hawkers selling goods at the fair which was held at the holy place and on the refusal of the petitioners, respondent No.3 was annoyed and demolished all the residential houses of the petitioners. It is stated that bull-dozers were brought to raze to ground, a portion of the building. The petitioners have appended site plan for the built up property and demarcates the portions that were removed by shading them in red colour. As per the site plan, as many as 17 rooms marked in red colour were said to have been demolished. A boundary wall enclosing the property was also demolished. The petitioners have detailed their own plight that it was rainy season at that time and there was no place of shelter for the petitioners or their family members. The highhandedness of the Authorities was also highlighted in the press.

3. The petitioners claim that a panchayat was immediately convened on the complaint against the third respondent under whose direct supervision, demolition had been made and the panchayat passed a resolution condemning the act. The petitioners were claiming that they had made representations on 25.5.2000 and 3.3.2000 to the executive heads of the State complaining against the 3rd respondent. The State responded by suspension of the S.D.M. and paid Rs.50,000/- as interim compensation for the damage caused to their building. Copies of the cheques paid to the petitioners are also annexed along with the petition. The petitioners would also state that an amount of Rs.10,000/- was given to daughter of Ram Lubhaya whose marriage was to be performed but all the gift articles collected to be given at the time of marriage were also damaged by the act of the 3rd respondent. The petitioners would contend that the 3rd respondent had committed serious offences of criminal trespass and indulged in acts that were liable for punishment under Sections 427, 447 and 506 IPC.

III. The prayer in the writ petition

4. The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the Ist respondent, namely, State of Punjab through the Secretary Home Affairs to take disciplinary action against 3rd respondent, SDM, Ajnala, who is identified by name Sh.J.P.Singh and to pay compensation for the loss caused by the third respondent.

IV. The contentions in reply by respondents

(a) Resolution of the Temple Committee for steps for removal of encroachment.

5. In response to the contention raised by the petitioners, significantly, it is not denied that a portion of the construction was indeed demolished by the 3rd respondent. The State would not join issues on the particular acts attributed to the 3rd respondent except to state that the State had no information that the 3rd respondent had committed any offence by trespassing into the houses of the petitioners. It is also stated in defence that the petitioners themselves had not submitted any representation regarding the occurrence before Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar. Th