MILKHA SINGH vs DIVISIONAL CANAL OFICER AND OTHERS

APURVA 2026.05.29 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not press the present writ petition insofar the challenge to the orders dated 18.11.2025 (Annexure P-2) and 13.03.2026 (Annexure P-5), whereby restoration of the watercourse has been ordered; is concerned. However, he prays that appropriate directions be issued to the concerned authorities to restore the watercourse at the site through an underground pipeline. At this stage, Mr. Harpreet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, appears on behalf of the respondent-State, in pursuance of the advance copy of paper book having already been supplied to him. He seeks an accommodation to get necessary instructions regarding the feasibility of restoring the watercourse through an underground pipeline from Point ‘A’ to Point ‘B’, as depicted in the Site Plan (Annexure P-3). At his request, adjourned to 25.05.2026.” APURVA 2026.05.29 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh APURVA 2026.05.29 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment Hi