FATIA Vs. B R ANAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of C.W.P. No. 5486 and thirty other C.W.P. Nos. 6389, 6390, 6391, 6392, 6393, 6394, 6395, 6396, 6397, 6398, 6399, 6400, 6401, 6402, 6403, 6404, 6405, 6406, 6407, 6408, 6409, 6410, 6411, 6412, 6413, 6414, 6415, 6416, 6417 and 6418 of 1986 as common questions of fact and law are involved in all these writ petitions. For appreciating the brief history of the case, facts have been taken from C.W.P. No. 5486 of 1986.

(2.) Petitioner Fatia is a Harijan and resident of village Roopawali, district Kurukshetra, in the State of Haryana. According to him, a number of years ago, the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Roopawali, gave the land in dispute to the petitioner for cultivation as a tenant on a fixed yearly rent of Rs. 32/- per acre. Thereafter, the petitioner brought the land under cultivation and is still in its possession till today. During this period, the petitioner has been paying the amount of Lagan regularly by depositing the same in the Central Cooperative Bank, Radore, and has also been retaining certain receipts of the aforesaid deposits (Annexure P.9 to the writ petition). In addition to that, in the Jamabandis for the years 1974-75, 1979-80 and 1984-85, the name of petitioner Fatia is entered in column No. 5 pertaining to cultivation as well as in column No. 9 relating to Lagan. The amount of Rs. 32/- per acre per year is also mentioned. There is no Patta in writing or any oral lease in addition to the above Jamabandi entries which have presumption of truth being part of the revenue records. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the lease or Patta in writing for one year or oral lease, coupled with the fact that the petitioner is in possession of the land for the last many years, should be considered as enough for treating the petitioner as lessee of the Panchayat land.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that despite all the above referred to documentary evidence on record, on 21st July, 1984, the Gram Panchayat, Roopawali, respondent No. 3, filed an application under Section 7(2) of the Punjab Village common Lands Act, 1961, in the Court of Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Thanesar, for ejectment of the petitioner as he was in unauthorised possession, with a further prayer that the petitioner be also burdened with heavy penalty as he had been retaining the land in his unauthorised possession for the last many years. Copy of the application is at Annexure P-1 to the writ petition. In repl to the application, the petitioner pleaded that he was in possession of the land in dispute for the last more than sixteen years and had been paying rent etc. and thereby the relationship of landlord and tenant stood established. It has been specifically pleaded that the petitioner never took the land in dispute on Patta for one year. Hence, the question of expiry of the term of one year did not arise. He prayed that the application for ejectment should be dismissed. However, the learned Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Kurukshetra, vide his detailed order dated 29th July, 1986, Annexure P-3, after considering the entire documentary evidence on record as well as appreciating the oral evidence brought before him, held that the petitioner was in unauthorised occupation of the land in dispute. consequently, the petitioner was ordered to be ejected from the land in dispute under Section 7(2) of the Punjab Village Common Lands Act and a penalty at the rate of Rs. 100/- from Kharif 1976 to Rabi 1980, Rs. 150/- from Kharif 1980 to Rabi 1983 and Rs. 200/- from Kharif 1983 to Rabi 1986 per acre per annum was imposed upon the petitioner from the expiry of Patta.