RAJ KUMAR Vs. THE COLLECTOR KARNAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition is to the orders passed in proceedings under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') whereby the petitioner was ordered to be evicted from the land measuring 0 kanal 3 marla comprising in khasra No. 370, khewat No. 338 and khatoni No. 506. Sumer Chand respondent No. 5 filed a petition under Section 7 of the Act asserting that he is recorded as owner in possession of residential plot No. 128 and that there is common street on the land as mentioned above i.e. 16 feet 6 inches in width and 53 feet in length which connect the plot of the applicant to the village passage (Phirni). It is the only passage to ingress and egress to his plot. Surrier Chand respondent No. 5 has further referred to that he moved an application for demarcation of this common street. Som Nath retired kanungo was appointed as Commission by the Tehsildar, who inspected the spot on 26.01.2011. The petitioner was found to be an encroacher upon the area of common street. With the said pleading, the eviction of the present petitioner was sought through the petition under Section 7 of the Act filed on 3.3.2011.

(2.) In reply, the stand of the present petitioner is that his forefathers and forefathers of Sumer Chand respondent No. 5 had compromised whereby the forefathers of Sumer Chand has taken money from his forefathers and passage was given to the forefathers of Sumer Chand respondent No. 5 but now with a view to harass him, the present petition has been filed. In reply on merits, it was denied that there was a common street.

(3.) Learned Assistant Collector passed an order of eviction after getting the spot inspected by Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Panipat. The penalty of Rs. 10,000/- per hectare per year was also imposed upon the petitioner. Such order was affirmed in appeal. However, in revision, the learned Commissioner recorded finding that as per jamabandi for the year 2005-06 on record, Gram Panchayat is owner of the disputed land which is shown as gair mumkin Gali. The learned Commissioner further held that there is no document on record to prove the oral exchange.