GRAM PANCHAYAT NALINI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter here concerns ejectment of persons in possession of Shamilat den land under the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act).

(2.) It was the case of the appellant Gram Panchayat that the land, in question, was shamilat deh and the respondents were in illegal possession thereof. At application under section 7 of the Act, was consequently filed by the Gram Panchayat seeking the ejectment. The plea of the respondents in defence being that they were owners in possession of this land since prior to January 26, 1950 and their possession was thus protected under clause (ii) of sub-section (3) of section 4 of the Act. The Collector by his order of May 21, 1982, held in favour of the respondents and consequently dismissed the application of the Gram Panchayat. This was, however, reversed in appeal by the Joint Director Panchayats, Punjab (exercising the powers of the Commissioner), by an order passed by him on November 28, 1986. It is this order which came to be challenged in this Court in writ proceedings. The learned single Judge set it aside holding that the respondents' possession stood established from 1947 onwards and the impugned order of the Commissioner of November 28, 1986, was consequently quashed and the earlier order of Collector of May 21, 1982 restored. It is correctness of this judgment that is now questioned in this Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) A reading of the impugned judgment would show that in the first instance, the learned single Judge held that the appeal against the order of the Collector had not been filed by an authorised person. To appreciate this finding, it deserves note that the proceedings under Section 7 of the Act, were intimated on the application of the Gram Panchayat. Once the Collector decided the matter in favour of the respondents, no further action was taken by it. It was on that account that the Social Education and Panchayat Officer stepped in and preferred an appeal on behalf of the Gram Panchayat against the order of the Collector of May 21, 1982. This, it was held, he was not authorised to do. It appears that the attention of the learned Single Judge was not drawn to the notification issued by the President of India on April 11, 1980, under sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Act, whereby, for the purposes of the said sub-section, all Social Education and Panchayat Officers were specifically authorised with immediate effect. In the context of this notification, there can be no escape from the conclusion that the appeal had indeed been filed by a person authorised to do so.