Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Bhanu Parkash vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 20 August, 2019

Author: Rakesh Kumar Jain

Bench: Rakesh Kumar Jain

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH
209
                                                    CWP No.4940-2018
                                            Date of Decision:20.08.2019

Bhanu Parkash
                                                               .....Petitioner
                                  Versus
State of Haryana and others
                                                            .....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI

Present :   Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Ms. Kirti Singh, D.A.G., Haryana
            for respondents No.1 to 4.

            Mr. Ashok Kumr Khubber, Advocate
            for respondent No.6.

                                ****

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner is a resident of Village Damla, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar. Respondent No.6 has filed a petition under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (for short 'the 1691 Act') (as applicable to the State of Haryana) for seeking eviction of the petitioner from the land measuring 0 Kanal 9 Marla comprised in khewat/khatauni No.1003/1236, khasra No.409 min situated within the revenue estate of Village Damla, Had Bast No.484, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar, inter alia, on the ground that the said land is a part of gair mumkin rasta sare am and therefore it is a shamilat deh on which the petitioner has illegally encroached upon by raising a house. The said petition is allowed by the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade on 17.12.2015. Aggrieved against the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner. The said appeal has 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 16:57:45 ::: CWP No.4940-2018 -2- been disposed of on 13.10.2016 by the Collector, Yamuna Nagar with the following observations:-

"Thus, on the basis of the aforesaid discussion, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed to the extent of setting aside the order under appeal passed by the Lower Court. However, as in the demarcations dated 30.05.2010 and dated 21.04.2012 of the land in question, there were differences about illegal encroachment of the appellant and respondents N.3 and 4 over the land in dispute, therefore, the order under appeal is hereby modified that the possession of the land which is in illegal possession of the appellant and respondents No.3 and 4 be obtained only after conducting demarcation of the land in question in presence of both the parties."

The petitioner has also filed a suit under Section 13-A of the 1961 Act which is pending.

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the property in dispute does not fall within the definition of shamilat deh whereas on the other hand counsel for the respondent has submitted that the impugned order is only an order remanding the case back to the Assistant Collector Ist Grade to re-demarcate the land in the presence of both the parties despite the fact that there are two demarcation reports dated 30.05.2010 and 21.04.2012 already on record in which there is some difference.

Be that as it may, keeping in view the fact that the learned Court below has passed an innocuous order whereby the matter has been remanded back to the Assistant Collector Ist Grade to take the decision afresh after seeking demarcation of the property in dispute in the presence of the petitioner, we do not find any reason to interfere with the said decision. However, at the same time, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise the issue before the competent Court as to how the application under Section 7 of the Act is not maintainable. In case, 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 16:57:45 ::: CWP No.4940-2018 -3- any such objection is raised then the same shall be decided.

Parties are directed to appear before the Assistant Collector Ist Grade on 10.09.2019. It is made clear that it is a matter pertaining to the alleged encroachment made by the petitioner on the rasta sare am, therefore, Assistant Collector Ist Grade is hereby directed to decide the matter as early as possible but within a period of three months from the date of their appearance.

(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) JUDGE (ARUN KUMAR TYAGI) 20.08.2019 JUDGE Kothiyal Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No 3 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 16:57:45 :::