Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. (Oral):- The petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.5.2011 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Collector, Thanesar on an application filed under Sections 4 and 5 of the Punjab Public Premises Act, 1973 [for short ‘the Act’] by respondent No.5, order dated 2.6.2014 again passed by the Collector, Thanesar and order dated 24.3.2015 passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala.

2. The Case set up by the petitioner is that he has purchased an old built up house having an area of 216.66 sq. yards from Usha Rani wife of Ashok Kumar by way of a registered sale deed dated 31.8.2010. Respondent No.5 filed a suit for mandatory injunction against Kasturi Lal Bhatla, Amrit Lal Bhatla and the petitioner, alleging that the respondents in the suit have illegally encroached upon some area of the road of the Town Planning Scheme [TPS] No.5. The trial Court did not grant temporary injunction and dismissed the application of respondent No.5 vide its order dated 6.9.2010. However, in appeal the parties to the lis, in the civil suit, unanimously resolved that the land in dispute can be demarcated through the District Town Planning [DTP] in the presence of both the parties i.e. the Municipal Council and the plaintiff. Accordingly, the Appellate Court directed the parties to get the demarcation through DTP, Kurukshetra, who was further directed to get the disputed site demarcated in view of TPS No.5. The DTP, Kurukshetra submitted his report, thereafter, the application filed by respondent No.5 for temporary injunction was dismissed as withdrawn on 20.12.2010. Thereafter, respondent No.5 filed a petition under Sections 4 & 5 of the Act against Parveen Kumar and Municipal Council, Thanesar on 22.4.2010 because at that time the petitioner was not in picture as he had purchased suit property on 31.10.2010. The said application was allowed by the Collector vide impugned order dated 12.5.2011. Since, it was going to affect the rights of the petitioner vested in the disputed property, therefore, he filed an application for seeking review of the order but the said application was dismissed by the Collector, Thanesar on 8.12.2011 on the ground that the application for review was not maintainable. The petitioner thus, filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala, which was disposed of by him on 3.10.2012, with the following order: -

“Both the parties, the appellant as well as the respondents admit the TP Scheme and both the parties are agreed for demarcation taking the existing street building line and TP scheme as basis. In these circumstances the order passed by the Collector is set aside and the case is remanded to SDO (Civil)-cum-Collector, Thanesar with a director to carry out the demarcation from District Town Planner by taking the existing building line and TP Scheme as basis after giving notice to Municipal Council and the concerned parties and thereafter both the parties be provided opportunity to produce their respective evidence and thereafter, the case be decided afresh on the basis of merits.”

3. The demarcation was ultimately carried out by the DTP on 4.6.2013 along with the Executive Engineer of the Municipal Council and it was observed by him that “thus, it came to be decided by the officers/employees and other persons present at the spot that the boundaries of the disputed plot of Dharampal which has been shown in red colour in TP scheme No.5 Drawing No.DTP(KU)46/74 are correct as per the aforesaid scheme.”

4. The aforesaid demarcation was challenged by respondent No.5 and Municipal Council by filing objections, the matter was then decided by the Collector vide his order dated 2.6.2014. The relevant portion of his order is as under: -

“After hearing the parties and the learned counsel it was decided that the spot of the disputed land will be inspected by Collector Thanesar himself (orders of Commissioner, Ambala Division) whether there is street on the spot or not.

The parties were i