JUDGMENT

E. S. VENKATARAMIAH, J. :— The petitioners were plaintiffs. They instituted a suit in a representative capacity under O. 1, R. 8 of the Civil P.C. in the Court of the Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Barnala for a declaration that they were the owners in possession of the suit land along with some others, that the Gram Panchayat, Mehal Kalan, Tehsil Barnala, District Sangrur in the State of Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the Panchayat) had no sort of right in the suit land and that the suit land had been wrongly shown as belonging to the Panchayat by the entries made in the revenue records which were not binding on the plaintiffs and for an injunction restraining the Panchayat from interfering their possession. The Panchayat in the course of its written statement inter alia pleaded that the court before which the suit had been instituted had no jurisdiction to try it by virtue of the provisions of S. 13 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (Punjab Act No. 18 of 1961) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The trial court framed an issue relating to its jurisdiction and tried it as a preliminary issue. It held that since the question involved in the suit was simply one of title to the suit land and it was not necessary to decide whether the suit land was shamlat deh or not and whether the land had validly vested in the Panchayat or not being shamlat deh, it had jurisdiction to try the suit. Aggrieved by the said finding recorded by the trial court, the Panchayat filed a revision petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Revision Petition No. 571 of 1986.* The learned Judge who heard the revision petition came to the conclusion that the issues involved in the suit were not triable by a civil court by virtue of S. 11 read with S. 13 of the Act and accordingly he held that the suit was not maintainable before the civil court. The plaintiffs have preferred this petition before this Court under Art. 136 of the Constitution of India requesting the Court to grant leave to prefer an appeal against the decision of the High Court.

* Reported in 1986 Pun LJ 307.

2. Section 2(g) of the Act defines the expression Shamlat deh as under :

"2(g) shamlat deh includes -

(1) lands described in the revenue records as shamlat deh excluding abadi deh;

(2) shamlat tikkas;

(3) lands described in the revenue records as shamlat, tarafs, patties, pannas and tholas and used according to revenue records for the benefit of the village community or a part thereof or for common purposes of the villages;

(4) lands used or reserved for the benefit of village community including streets, lanes, playgrounds, schools, drinking wells, or ponds within abadi deh or gorah deh; and

(5) lands in any village described as banjar qadim and used for common purposes of the village according to revenue records:

Provided that shamlat deh at least to the extent of twentyfive per centum of the total area of the village does not exist in the village ................."

3. The Act was amended by the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) (Amendment) Act, 1976. Section 7 of the above Amending Act substituted the original Ss. 11, 12 and 13 of the Act by new sections. After the amendment Ss. 11, 12 and 13 read as follows :

"11. Decision of claims of right, title or interest in shamlat deh.- (1) Any person claiming right, title or interest in any land vested or deemed to have been vested in a Panchayat under this Act, or claiming that any land has not so vested in a Panchayat, may submit to the Collector, within such time as may be prescribed, a statement of his claim in writing and signed and verified in the prescribed manner and the Collector shall have jurisdiction to decide such claim in such manner as may be prescribed.

(2) Any person or a Panchayat aggrieved by an order of the Collector made under sub-section (1) may, within sixty days from the date of the order, prefer an appeal to the Commissioner in such form and manner as may be prescribe