GUJAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed to quash the orders of the Collector Patiala dated January 9, 1980 which is attached to the petition as Annexure P.2 and the order of the Joint Director, Panchayats dated March 11,1981 which is attached to the petition as Annexure P.3.

(2.) THE Gram Panchayat of Mavi Sappan filed an application before the Collector under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act for the ejectment of the Petitioner Gujjar Singh, alleging that the petitioner has illegally and forcibly occupied the land belonging to the Gram Panchayat and that the petitioner refused to deliver possession of the same instead of demands. According to the case of the petitioner, he filed a suit in the year 1968 for recovery of the possession of the land including the land in dispute from the Gram Panchayat and that suit was decreed by the Senior Sub Judge, Patiala on May 27, 1968 and therefore, his title has been established in a Court of law and therefore, the Gram Panchayat cannot claim the eviction of the petitioner from the land in question. The Collector in his order Annexure P.2, held that the property is owned by Gram Panchayat Mavi Sappan and it is in illegal possession of the respondent (the petitioner herein) and therefore ordered ejectment of the petitioners from the said land. This order was confirmed by the Joint Director of Panchayats, Punjab according to whom the land in question vests in the Gram Panchayat and the petitioner has been in forcible possession of the same. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the land which the Gram Panchayat is now claiming, was the subject matter of the civil suit filed by him in the year 1968 and that suit was decreed and that the decree passed by the Senior Sub Judge, Patiala has become final and is therefore, binding on the Gram Panchayat as the Gram Panchayat was also party to the suit. Annexure P. 1 is the decree passed on May 27, 1968 by the Senior Sub Judge, Patiala. It shows that there was a compromise between the petitioner and the Gram Panchayat and the suit was decreed in terms of the compromise and possession of the property was given to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Gram Panchayat Village Batholi Kalan v. Jagar Ram and Ors. wherein section -13 -B of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act was interpreted. Under Section 13 -B the provisions of the Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in law or in agreement, instrument, custom or usage decree or order of any Court or other authority. While dealing with Section 13 -B of the Act, this Court observed as follows: -

(3.) THEREFORE , according to the Full Bench decision referred to above, the decree passed by the Civil Court cannot be ignored by the authorities concerned acting under the Act. Both the Collector and the Joint Director, Panchayats have not considered the effect of a decree granted by the Senior Sub Judge, Patiala in suit No. 48 of 1968, decided on May 27, 1968. There is no dispute that the said decree which is attached to the writ -petition as Annexure P.1, has become final. Under the said decree the possession of the property had been given to the petitioner. It is, therefore, not open to the Gram Panchayat to say that the petitioner has been in illegal and forcible possession of the property covered by the said decree. Therefore, the application filed by the Gram Panchayat, Mavi Sappan before the Collector under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Land Act is misconceived.