(O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP No.18818 of 2021 (O&M)

Date of decision: 28.09.2021

Jasbir Singh and ors.

..Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and ors.

..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:

Mr. Ravneet Singh Joshi, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Sunint Kaur, AAG, Punjab.

***

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J

This is yet another attempt by the dairy farm owners to stall their

shifting outside the area of the city. Previously, certain dairy farm owners

filed CWP No.13817 of 2021 (Kirpal Singh and others vs. State of Punjab

and others) decided on 04.08.2021 praying for a similar relief. While noticing

the history of the decision of the Municipal Corporation to shift dairies

running from the city, the Court held as under:-

<From the pleadings and facts stated in the annexures,

its apparent out that the petitioners are running the business of

dairy by keeping milk yielding animals within the area of

Municipal Corporation, Patiala. In the year 2002, a complaint

was submitted to the Punjab State Human Rights Commission.

The Punjab State Human Rights Commission vide an order

dated 04.03.2003 directed the Municipal Corporation to take

action as envisaged under Section 345(2) of the Municipal

ASHOK KUMAR

2021.10.01 14:18

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

(O&M)

Corporation Act, 1976. Thereafter, on a further complaint, a

report was sought from the official respondents. The Municipal

Corporation issued notice to the dairy owners to shift within a

period of one month vide notice dated 05.07.2004. The

decision of the Municipal Corporation was challenged by filing

CWP No.11594 of 02 which was disposed of by directing the

petitioner to approach the authorities. Thereafter, an

application was filed before the Punjab State Human Rights

Commission which was disposed of vide order dated

09.08.2004 and the operative observations made therein are as

under:-

< It was then submitted by the counsel for

the applicants that a grave injustice is going to be

done to the applicants as their names are likely to

excluded from the list of the allottees who are

likely to be alternative site in lieu of their dairies

and in this manner the right of equality of the

applicants is likely to be sacrificed and infringed

by the Corporation and it will be a serious

violation of Human Rights within the meaning of

Section 2(d) of the Protection of Human Right

Act, 1993. There is force in the contention raised

by the learned counsel for the applicant. Section

2(d) lays down <Human Rights= means the rights

relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the

individual guaranteed by the Constitution. If

Karnail Singh and his son Hardip Singh are

genuine dairy owners as established by the report

of the health authorities, dated 3/13/2003, there

should not be any violation of right of equality of

the present applicants and their name should also

be considered at the time of allocation of an

alternative site alongwith other dairy owners as

and when the local authorities take exercise.=

Thereafter, the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation,

Patiala, submitted a report to the Human Rights Commission.

In order to shift the dairies situated within the city out of

the municipal area, a conscious decision was taken. In that

ASHOK KUMAR

2021.10.01 14:18

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

(O&M)

process, land measuring 15 acres owned by the Municipal

Corporation in village Ablowal was identified. However, since

the aforesaid piece of land was not sufficient, additional land

measuring 6.25 acres owned by the Forest Department was

also requisitioned. Thus, on a total land measuring 21.25 acres,

the project was sought to be developed. It appears from the

reading of Annexure P-9 that now, after carrying out some

development in the area earmarked, the allotment of