SARDARA RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in the present petition is to order dated 13.11.2002, Annexure P3, passed by Assistant Collector and appellate order, dated 29.7.2003, Annexure P4, passed by Collector. Whereas vide order dated 13.11.2002, Annexure P3, Assistant Collector ordered eviction of the petitioner in the proceedings launched against him under Section 7(2) of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, the appeal preferred by him against the order of Assistant Collector was dismissed vide order dated 29.7.2003, Annexure P4. While issuing notice of motion on September 12, 2003 on the contention of learned counsel, the following order was recorded :-

(2.) PURSUANT to the notice issued by this Court, respondents have filed reply. We are unable to read any reference in the impugned order, discussion or evidence on the basis of which finding might have been recorded that the land vests with the Gram Panchayat under Section 2(g)(1) of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961. At the most, there are some conjectures and surmises on the basis of which the whole issue has been decided. This, in our view, is not a way to deal with the rights of the parties. The findings have necessarily to be recorded on the strength of the evidence that had been led by the parties to which, as mentioned above, there is no reference in the impugned order. In our view, interest of justice would be served if we set aside orders Annexure P3 and P4 and remit the matter to Assistant Collector to determine the controversy afresh in the light of the evidence that might have been led by the parties and coming to conclusion by a process of reasoning. So ordered. Petition is disposed of accordingly. Parties through their counsel are directed to appears before learned Assistant Collector on 5.3.2004. The Assistant Collector would, endeavour his very best to decide the matter as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months from today. Order accordingly.