Punjab-Haryana High Court
Booti Ram And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 18 April, 2012
Bench: Rajive Bhalla, Rakesh Kumar Jain
Civil Writ Petition No.15420 of 2010 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.15420 of 2010
Date of Order: 18.04.2012
Booti Ram and others ...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others ..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
Present: Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. N.D.S.Mann, Addl. A.G.,Punjab
for respondents no.1 to 4
Mr. R.K.Kapila, Advocate
for respondent no.5.
Mr. Ranjit S. Dhiman, Advocate
for respondent no.8.
RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)
The petitioners pray for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondents no.2 to 8 not to harass the petitioners or dispossess them from 4 marlas plots, allotted by the Gram Panchayat, vide resolution dated 05.03.1995 (Annexure P-1).
Counsel for the petitioners submits that 4 marlas plots were allotted to each of the petitioners, vide resolution dated 05.03.1995, but the Panchayat in connivance with other residents of the village seeks to dispossess the petitioners from the land in dispute. It is further submitted that the resolution was forwarded to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer for granting approval Civil Writ Petition No.15420 of 2010 -2- and the mere fact that it may not have been forwarded by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer to the Government, does not entitle the Gram Panchayat to forcibly dispossess the petitioners.
Counsel for the Gram Panchayat and counsel for the State of Punjab submit that, though, such a resolution exists in the proceedings book but it appears to be forged and fabricated. The Panchayat has, therefore, forwarded a request to the Director Consolidation to cancel the said resolution. It is prayed that as the petitioners are unauthorised occupants, they should not be granted any relief.
We have heard counsel for the parties, perused resolution dated 05.03.1995 and as adjudication of the inter-se rights of parties would involve consideration of disputed question of fact, namely, whether resolution dated 05.03.1995 was obtained by fraud/fabrication etc., we relegate the petitioners to seek their remedy in accordance with law. In case, the petitioners approach a civil court within one month, their dispossession shall remain stayed, for this period of one month.
Disposed of accordingly.
RAJIVE BHALLA)
JUDGE
April 18, 2012 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN)
nt JUDGE