RANDHIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of CWP No.1182, 9498 and 9499 of 2012 in respect of land situated in village Bishangarh, Tehsil and District Patiala on identical facts arising out of a petition under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') filed by the petitioners herein. For the facility of reference the name of the petitioners in each case, the date of order passed by the Collector under Section 11 of the Act and that of the Commissioner is extracted below in tabulated form:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_153_TLP&H0_2014_1.html</FRM>

(2.) This order shall also dispose of LPA Nos.241, 257 and 296 of 2014 directed against the order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 10.09.2002 along with an application for condonation of delay of 4061 days, challenging the orders passed by the Collector and the Commissioner on an application under Section 7 of the Act filed by the Panchayat. The writ petitions were dismissed. The name of the appellants and the date of orders are again extracted in the following table:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_153_TLP&H0_2014_2.html</FRM>

(3.) The Gram Panchayat filed an application under Section 7 of the Act on or about 20.11.1981 against Nikka Singh son of Narain Singh, the said proceedings are now subject matter of LPA No.241 of 2014; against Durga son of Tulsi which is subject matter of LPA No.257 of 2014 and against Dharam Singh son of Nikka Singh, which is subject matter of LPA No.296 of 2014. The Panchayat in these proceedings asserted that Gram Panchayat is owner of the land in dispute which is shamilat and that this land was given on lease to the present appellants and that the occupants are in illegal possession of the same. The occupants denied the vesting of the land in Gram Panchayat and that it does not fall under the definition of shamilat. The land is shown as shamlat patti nungran hasab rasad zar khewat and that they are in possession since long. After giving opportunity to the parties to lead evidence, the learned Collector found that in the column of ownership the land is shown as shamlat patti nungran. As per Jamabandi for the year 1958-59 (Ex.A4) the land is described as Charand and thus is shamilat as per Section 2(g) of the Act. It also found that the occupants have not produced any proof of ownership nor produced any proof of possession on the land before 26.01.1950. Such order was affirmed in appeal as well.