The Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1953 prevails in the State of Punjab and the State Legislature is competent to enact laws relating to Shamlat-Deh lands. The Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 does not take away the character of Shamlat-Deh lands but only vests in the custodian the interest that the evacuee possessed in them. The State Legislature can make laws relating to agrarian reform, including laws affecting land vested in the Central Government or the Custodian.

Amarjeet Chaudhary, J.

1. A bunch of writ petitions bearing Nos. 3015 of 1983, 6915 of 1986, 694, 7468, 8256, 8506, 8750, 8751, 8783, 8961, 8962, 9070, 9117, 9143, 9149, 9478, 9479, 8963 of 1987, 3566, 3174, 293 of 1988, 376, 377, 378, 1204 of 1989, 10046, 9226, 9164, 9451, 9697, 10638, 10645 of 1993 and 5661 of 1984 involving common questions of law and fact are being disposed of by a common judgment. For the purpose of order, the question of law canvassed in Civil Writ Petition No. 5661 of 1984 is being discussed.

2. Gram Panchayat Johar Majra Kalan, petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 5661 of 1984, is aggrieved against the order of the Assistant Collector conferring proprietary rights on the Department of Rehabilitation in consequence of letter No. 5(31-GI)/12535-41/68, dated 16.8.1973 and letter dated 25.9.1981 and the mutation sanctioned in favour of Rehabilitation Department. There were certain villages in the composite State of Punjab, now falling in the State of Haryana, which were inhabited by the Muslims, who were proprietors of the said villages and had proportionate undivided interest in the village common land which belonged to the Gram Panchayat. The said land was covered by the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Punjab Act, 1953). As a result of their proprietary interest in those lands were not liable to be partitioned nor could be alienated and were intended to be used and were in fact used, without exception, as undivided property of the proprietors of the other land and the Muslims who had no property/land in the village had no right in the Shamlatdeh lands.

3. After the partition of the country, in order to manage the property of the Muslims left behind by them, an Act known as East Punjab Evacuees (Administration of Property) Act, 14 of 1947 was passed. However, the said Act was replaced by an Act passed by the Parliament, i.e. the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act of 1950). Property/land left behind by the muslims in the country Was declared to be an evacuee property and was allotted to the displaced persons under the provisions of Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. Shamlat Deh lands in which Muslims were having undivided interest were also allotted to the displaced persons. The said lands were allotted by the Rehabilitation Department on the belief that the interest in such lands of the Muslims, who migrated to Pakistan, is evacuee which the Central Government has a right to allot under the provisions of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act of 1954. However, the Gram Panchayat had taken a strong objection to the allotment of, said land on the ground that in view of the provisions of Punjab Act, 1953, the interest of all persons, whether Hindus, Sikhs or Muslims, in the Shamlat-Deh lands stood extinguished and by virtue of the Act, the lands were placed under the powers of respective Gram Panchayats.

4. Similar controversy came up before the Supreme Court of India in Gram Panchayat of village Jamalpur v. Malwinder Singh and Ors., 1985, P.L.J. 463. The controversy before the Apex Court was whether the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, would prevail in State of Punjab over Administration of Evacuee property in so far Shamlat Deh lands are concerned.

5. The Supreme Court of India while dealing with the proposition held that the Punjab Act shall prevail in the State of Punjab, and the State Legislature is competent to enact law.

6. The Apex Court in Gram Panchayat of Village Jamalpurs case (supra) has held that, "the effect of the Administration of the Evacuee Property Act was not to take away the character of Shamlat-Deh as Shamlat-Deh but only to vest in the custodian such interest at the evacuee possessed in the Shamlat-Deh. The interest which the erstwhile evacuees possessed in the Shamlat-Deh was neither enlarger nor abridged. The