VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief facts of this case are that Anil Kumar son of Som Prakash filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 [for short 'the Act'] for seeking ejectment of Anand Prakash and Jogmohan sons of Amarnath from the land falling in Khewat No.361, Khatauni No.444, Khasra Nos.72/3-1(8-2), 4/1, 9, 10, 12 and 13/1 situated in village Damla, District Yamunanagar. The respondents in the said petition raised question of title which was decided by the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade vide his order dated 17.12.1997 in favour of the Gram Panchayat holding that the land in dispute is a gau charand and vests in the Gram Panchayat. Appeal filed against the said order, by the said respondents, was dismissed by the Collector on 13.10.1998. However, the 1 of 4 Commissioner, vide his order dated 09.11.1999, set aside both the orders dated 17.12.1997 and 13.10.1998. Anil Kumar challenged the order dated 09.11.1999 by way of CWP-1931-2000 which was allowed on 30.05.2013, setting aside the order dated 09.11.1999 passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala. Thereafter, ejectment order was passed by the AC Ist Grade on 18.12.2015, who on his own, recorded his suggestion to the Gram Panchayat that since there are about 250 cows and bulls in the gaushala, therefore, the land may be reserved for them. The said order of the AC Ist Grade dated 18.12.2015 was challenged in appeal by the said respondents which was dismissed vide order dated 17.11.2016 holding that the possession of the respondents was unauthorized over the land in dispute and also ordered the Gram Panchayat to take possession of the gaushala and look after the cows on its own and in case the appellant therein want to run the gaushala he can do the same by transferring it to some other land. Thereafter, the Gram Panchayat passed a resolution dated 11.6.2017 and decided to lease out the land comprising in Khasra No.72//1/21,9 and 10, total land measuring 2 acre, 2 kanal and 18 marla to Lal Badhawa Ram Gaushala Committee Regd. for a period of 33 years. The petitioner challenged the resolution of the Panchayat dated 11.6.2017 before the Deputy Commissioner. The said resolution was not accepted by the Government and was thus not acted upon. A civil suit for permanent injunction was filed by Saurabh Singla s/o Anand Parkash Singla for restraining the Gram Panchayat from interfering in the actual physical possession of the plaintiff. In the said civil suit an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC was also filed which was allowed on 21.9.2018 restraining the defendant/Gram Panchayat from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit land by force except in the due course of law.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that because of the said injunction, the possession is not being taken from private respondent No.8 though the order of eviction was passed as far as back on 18.12.2015. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the main reason for not taking possession was the order passed by the Civil Court against which the Gram Panchayat has also filed miscellaneous civil appeal.

(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.