RAM SINGH Vs. COLLECTOR, FARIDABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners pray for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing orders dated 31.3.1992 and 22.7.1991 passed by the Collector, Faridabad and the Assistant Collector, Faridabad, respectively, ordering their eviction and dismissing their appeals. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and before them their predecessors, are recorded, in possession as tenants on payment of rent for the last more than 35 years. A perusal of the jamabandi for the year 1954 -55 reveals that the petitioners' father Udhmi Ram son of Bikhan son of Ram Sukh, is recorded as "Gair Marausi" on payment of 'chakota' of Rs.54/ - with respect to 79K -8M of land. The entry is repeated in all subsequent jamabandis as well as in the khasra girdawaris. The petitioners, being tenants and not unauthorised occupants, cannot be evicted under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Counsel for the petitioners further submits that as a relationship of landlord and tenants subsists between the parties, the petitioners can only be evicted by filing a suit for possession. Even if it is held that the petitioners are not tenants, their possession has to be protected under Section 4(3)(ii) of the Act.

(2.) COUNSEL for the respondents, however, submits that the petitioners are neither tenants nor lessees of the Gram Panchayat. The petitioners have not been able to produce any pattanama or lease deed, much less are they able to refer to any payment of 'chakota' (rent) to the Gram Panchayat. The petitioners are unauthorised occupants, who are taking advantage of wrong entries in the jamabandis and have remained in unauthorised possession of a large parcel of land for the last more than 50 years. The impugned orders holding that the petitioners are unauthorised occupants, are legal and valid and do not call for interference.

(3.) WE have heard counsel for the parties, perused the impugned orders, the relevant revenue record and after a thoughtful consideration of the arguments, are not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders or grant any relief to the petitioners.