(1.) Though this writ petition has been filed to quash the order (Annexure P4) dated 12.10.1994 passed by the respondent No. 1, in substance the petitioners have also challenged the legality of order (Annexure P-2) dated 27.5.1992 passed by the District Development and Panchayat Officer-cum-Collector, Jalandhar.
(2.) On the basis of an application filed on behalf of the Gram Panchayat Talwandi Sibu under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1961 Act'), the respondent No.2 issued a notice to the petitioner Ajaib Singh and after hearing the parties the respondent No.2 held that the disputed land measuring 64 Kanals in Khasra No.4/7 (8-0), 8(8-0), 9(8-0), 10(8-0), 11(8-0), 12(8-0), 13(8-0), 14(8-0), Khewat No.60, Khatauni No.84 situated in village Talwandi Sibu is under the ownership of Gram Panchayat and the petitioner who is in unauthorised occupation of the said land is liable to the dispossessed. The respondent No.2 also directed the petitioner Ajaib Singh to pay compensation at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- for keeping the land in unauthorised occupation upto the year 1988 and thereafter levied Rs. 2,00,000/- as damages. Against the order of the respondent No.2 the petitioners filed an appeal before the Director, Panchayats. It appears from the record that interim order was passed in their favour but it was subsequently vacated. Against the vacation of the stay order the petitioners filed C.W.P. No. 9571 of 1993 which was decided by the High Court on 12.8.1993 with the direction to the Director, Panchayats to decide the appeal on or before 16.4.1993 and till then the execution of the order of dispossession was suspended. In accordance with the direction given by the High Court the respondent No.1 decided the appeal of the petitioner along with other 6 appeals of similar nature and dismissed the same vide order (Annexure P4) dated 12.10.1994.
(3.) The petitioners have challenged the proceedings initiated under section 7 of the 1961 Act on the ground that the land in dispute does not form part of Shamilat deh of village Talwandi Sibu and, therefore, proceedings could not have been initiated by the Gram Panchayat under Section 7 of the 1961 Act. According to the petitioners, the land of village Talwandi Sibu is situated near River Satluj and the land of that village was mostly Banjar-Qadim and Ghair Mumkin. This entire land has been incorporated in the revenue record as Shamlat Deh Hasab Rasad Zar Khewat, which was being cultivated by the right holders of the village. including the land-allotees and the petitioners (vendees). Further case of the petitioners is that in the year 1978 they attempted to bring the disputed land into cultivation and spent huge amount in the process. After about 9 years the Gram Panchayat threatened them with dispossession. This compelled the petitioners to institute a suit in the Court of Sub Judge Ist Class, Nawanshehr, which was decreed in their favour on 27.7.1988. Immediately thereafter the Gram Panchayat resorted to the proceedings under the 1961 Act. Contention of the petitioners is that Shamlat Deh Hasab Rasad Zar Khewat does not fall within the purview of Section 2(g) of the 1961 Act and consequently the Gram Panchayat does not have any locus standi to invoke the provisions of the 1961 Act. Another contention of the petitioners is that they are in possession of the land as its vendees and in view of the judgment passed by the Civil Court the respondent No. 2 could not have ordered eviction of the petitioners. Yet another contention of the petitioners is that the order passed by the respondent No. 2 is without jurisdiction because a dispute regarding title was raised by the petitioners, but the same has not been decided. The petitioners have also questioned the imposition of levy of damages amounting to Rs. 2,50,000/- on the ground of violation of Rule 20-A of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1964 Rules')