THE GRAM PANCHAYAT HAS THE ONUS OF PROVING THAT THE LAND IN DISPUTE IS SHAMILAT DEH AND THAT IT IS BEING USED FOR COMMON PURPOSES.

R.L.Anand, J.

1. Sarvshri Gurmukh Singh, Gian Singh and Santokh Singh, the present petitioners have filed the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorari/mandamus and they have prayed for the quashment of Annexures P.3 and P.4 by which the petitioners have been ordered to be evicted from the land in question.

2. The case set up by the petitioners is that they are in continuous possession of the land measuring 24 kanals forming part of Khasra No. 40-Min situated in village Ghaimi Badeshan, Tehsil and District Amritsar since 1968 as pattedars of the Punjab Wakf Board, respondent No. 2. The land is Abadi deh and not a shamilat deh. Respondent No. 1 i.e. the Gram Panchayat had tried to interfere with the rights of the petitioners. Resultantly, respondent No. 4 Rur Singh filed a civil suit in the Court of Sub Judge Ist Class, Amritsar on 24.12.1970 against respondent No. 2 (Punjab Wakf Board) and others for declaration to the effect that khasra No. 40 as entered in jamabandi as a common land of village and is meant for their use. It was further claimed in the said suit that defendants have nothing to do with the suit land. That suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 31.8.1973. While disposing of the suit as to whether the land in question was the common land of abadi deh or not, the Civil Court categorically held that plaintiff Rur Singh i.e. respondent No. 4 had not been able to prove that the land in question was the common land of village abadi deh. Rur Singh impleaded Jagat Singh as defendant No. 2 in the said suit. Jagat Singh is the father of Gian Singh petitioner No. 2 in the present writ petition. Inspite of the dismissal of the suit which became final, the Gram panchayat of village Bhaini Badeshan wanted to interfere into the peaceful and lawful possession of the petitioners as a result of which the petitioners filed a suit on 2.3.1976 in the Court of Sub Judge, Amritsar for declaration that they are in possession of the disputed land and that the Gram panchayat has no right, title or interest in the said land. This suit was decreed on 22.9.1978 wherein it was held that the land in question belonged to. Punjab Wakf Board and that the petitioners are its tenant. This judgment has not been challenged either by the Gram Panchayat or by the wakf Board and it has become final. In spite of the categorical findings of the civil Court which considered all oral and documentary evidence, respondent No. 1 Gram Panchayat again started eviction proceedings under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act against the petitioners before the Collector who passed ejectment order of the petitioner on 1.7.1980. In the said proceedings respondent No. 1 Gram Panchayat made the basis of its claim by stating that the land in question formed part of abadi deh. The claim of the Gram Panchayat was resisted by the petitioner on the plea that they are pattedars under respondent No. 2 and had been paying rent regularly. Copies of the judgments of the Civil Court were also placed on record but in spite of the fact, the learned Collector passed the eviction order on 1.7.1980. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner who dismissed the same vide orders dated 11.2.1982. The petitioners have given challenge to the orders of Collector as well as the Commissioner (Annexures P.3 and P.4) on the ground that both the authorities did not take into consideration the decrees of the civil Courts which were competent to decide the question of title with regard to the land in possession of the petitioners, portion of which land does not fall within the definition of shamlat deh. It was incumbent on the part of the Collector as well as the Commissioner to give proper respect to the judgment of the civil Court and as such orders Annexures P.3 and P.4 are liable to be quashed which are based on mere surmises and conjectures.

3. The writ pe