Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the land, in dispute, is, admittedly, recorded as "Shamilat Deh". The Collector allowed the petition for eviction against Jamna Dass and Behal Singh, but wrongly dismissed the petition against Dalbir Singh. The Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal filed by the Gram Panchayat and allowed the appeals filed by Dalbir Singh, Jamna Dass and Behal Singh (the respondents in the other writ petitions) on the ground that as the land was "Banjar Qadim" on 9.1.1954, and not used for any common purpose, on the date of the coming into force of the Pepsu Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1954, (hereinafter referred to as the "1954 Act"), it does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. The Appellate Authority has also recorded a finding that the land, in dispute, was in cultivating possession of Nand Singh before 26.1.1950 and, therefore, does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. It is further submitted that the finding that Banjar land was not used for common purposes of the village is contrary to the Wazib-Ul-Arz, which clearly records that banjar land can be used for grazing of cattle (a common purpose). The finding that the land, in dispute, was in cultivating possession of Nand Singh is contrary to the finding that the land is "Banjar Qadim", i.e., land that has remained fallow for eight harvests. It is also argued that Dalbir Singh draws his title from a collusive civil court decree suffered in his favour by his father. The decree is, even otherwise, null and void, as it was passed after Section 13 of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "1961 Act"), was enacted, prohibiting a civil court from entertaining a suit relating to any right, title or interest in "Shamilat Deh". The decree does not bind the Gram Panchayat as the Gram Panchayat was not arrayed as a party. It is further submitted that decree dated 25.5.1982, obtained by Dalbir Singh against the Gram Panchayat, was collusive as the Sarpanch had no authority to admit the rights of Dalbir Singh. The decree has to be ignored in view of Sections 13 and 13-A of the 1961 Act. It is further submitted that order dated 29.1.1986 passed by the Joint Director Panchayats ordering the eviction of Joginder Singh has been ignored.

During pendency of the above appeal, Joginder Singh suffered a collusive decree, dated 25.5.1982, in favour of his son Dalbir Singh. The Gram Panchayat was not arrayed as a defendant. Daljit Singh also managed to get a mutation of ownership recorded in his name on 13.9.1982. Joginder Singh had, in the meanwhile, sold 12 Kanals-14 Marlas to Jamna Dass on 7.7.1982 and 23 Kanals-14 Marlas to Behal Singh etc. (the contesting respondents in the other petitions).

Dalbir Singh filed a civil suit on 23.8.1983 praying for a declaration of his ownership with respect to land measuring 62 Kanals-10 Marlas and for a permanent injunction to restrain the Gram Panchayat from interfering in his possession. The then Sarpanch put in appearance, filed a written statement admitting the claim of Dalbir Singh and made a statement that the Gram Panchayat shall not dispossess the plaintiff forcibly but the trial Court decreed the suit in its entirety on 12.9.1983 The Gram Panchayat filed an application for execution of eviction order dated 29.1.1986, passed by the Joint Director, Panchayats but the Collector dismissed the application by directing the Gram Panchayat to file a fresh petition against transferees from Joginder Singh.

The Gram Panchayat filed a fresh petition under Section 7 of the 1961 Act against Dalbir Singh, Jamna Dass and Behal Singh. The Collector ordered the eviction of Jamna Dass and Behal Singh but dismissed the petition with respect to Dalbir Singh by holding that though the land is "shamilat Deh", Dalbir Singh is in legal possession, of the land, in dispute. The Gram Panchayat, Dalbir Singh, Jamna Dass and Behal Singh filed separate appeals. The appeal filed by Gram Panchayat was dismissed whereas appeals filed by Dalbir Singh etc. were allowed by the Joint Director, Panchayat, by holding that on the date of coming into force of the 1954 Act, the land was 'Banjar Qadim" and as it was not used for any common purpose, it does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. The Joint Director also held that the land, in dispute, was in cultivating possession of Nand Singh, grand-father of Dalbir Singh and is, therefore, excluded from "Shamilat Deh".

The finding that the land was in cultivating possession of Nand Singh, grand-father of Dalbir Singh, the finding is contrary to the revenue record and to the plea that the land was "Banjar Qadim. Admittedly, on the coming into force of the 1954 Act, the quality of the land, in dispute, was "Banjar Qadim", i.e., land that has remained fallow for eight or more harvests. The land, in dispute, therefore, could not be in the "cultivating possession" of Nand Singh, grand father of Dalbir Singh, at any time before or after 1950. The finding recorded by the Appellate Authority that the land, in dispute, was in "cultivating possession" of the appellant's grandfather, is, therefore, factually incorrect and is set aside.