(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to order (Annexure P/5) passed by Collector, Palwal under Sections 4,5 and 7 of the Haryana Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1972 (For Short, the Public Premises Act) whereby, the petitioners were ordered to be evicted, inter alia for the reason that the petitioners cannot retain the land in question after they cease to render religious services being dholidars. Such order was affirmed in appeal by the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon vide order dated 11th November 1994 (Annexure P/6).
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that the predecessor-in-interests of the petitioners were recorded as Dholidars in the jamabandi for the years 1939-40, 1964-65 and for the years 1989-90. The jamabandi for the year 1939-40 and 1989-90 has been attached with the writ petition. The order passed by the Collector, Palwal shows that the jamabandi for the years 1964-65 is on record. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has produced said jamabandi for the perusal of the Court during hearing as well.
(3.) Though, the jamabandi for the years 1939-40 does not corelate the land in question in the absence of record showing the new khasra numbers in lieu of the khasra numbers mentioned therein, but jamabandis for the year 1964-65 and 1989-90 reflects the petitioners to be owner in possession of land as dholidars in the column of cultivators. The entry in the column of rent is 'Payment of rent is exempted in lieu of religious services rendered'. On the basis of such record, it is argued that in terms of Section 4 (3) (ii) of Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1961 the existing rights of dholidars are protected and, thus, on the basis of Haryana Amending Act No.9 of 1992, the land in dispute could not be mutated in the ownership of Municipal Committee as successor-in-interest of Gram Panchayat. It is also argued that during the pendency of the writ petition Haryana Dholidar, Butimar, Bhondedar and Muqararidar (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act, 2010 (For short the 2010 Act) conferring proprietary rights/ownership rights on the dholidars, who are in possession as dholidars for the period of last 20 years on the appointed day i.e. from the day of publication on which the said Act came into force. Thus, it is contended that as the petitioners are in possession from more than 20 years even prior to the initiation of the proceedings under the Public Premises Act, therefore, the petitioners are entitled for conferment of proprietary rights under the aforesaid Act.