AVTAR SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER, JULLUNDUR DIVISION AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order of the Commissioner, Jullundur Division, Jullundur (Annexure P.8), whereby the petitioner was ordered to be ejected from a piece of agricultural land under section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, since the said land in the revenue papers stood in the name of the Gram Panchayat Kariha, respondent No.4.

(2.) The matter as raised is essentially one of jurisdiction. The petitioner avers that 26 Kanals of agricultural land detailed in lease deed, P. 1, and receipts, P.2 to P.3, as Khasra No. 83 (8K-11 M.) and Khasra No 87 (17K-10 M.) in village Kariha were leased out by the Punjab Wakf Board to the father of the petitioner. On the latter's death, the petitioner and his brother continued as lessees of the said land and kept paying rent from time to time. The Gram Panchayat, respondent No. 4, moved an application under section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act against the father of the petitioner before the Assistant Collector. Ejectment was ordered on 28.11.1975 vide order, Annexure P.4. Apparently, in the meantime, the father of the petitioner died and he and his brothers, were unable to file an appeal within time. Belated by two days, they filed an appeal to the Collector successfully who condoned the delay and upset the order of the Assistant Collector on 24.6.1977 vide order, Annexure P. 6. The said order of the Collector was upset by the Commissioner on 20.6.1978 vide order, Annexure P. 9. This has given rise to the petitioner approaching this Court.

(3.) The sheet-anchor of the petitioner is a notification issued by the Government of India under section 5(2) of the Central Government's Wakf Act, 1954 read with rule 4 of the Punjab Wakf Rules, 1964 dated 6.2.1971. Thereunder some land inclusive of the land in dispute bearing Khasra Nos. 83 and 87 in village Kariha, described in the revenue papers as graveyard, has been de-clared as wakf property governed under that Act. On the strength thereof, the petitioner could unsuccessfully resist the eviction before the Collector on the premises that the aforesaid notification held sway over the entry in the revenue record showing the land to be owned by the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner had also successfully explained the delay in the filing of the appeal before the Collector. The Commissioner, however, has vide his impugned order, Annexure P.8, given predominance to the revenue records and has held the view of the Collector condoning the delay of two days in filing the appeal to be erroneous.