S.S.SANDHAWALIA, R.N.MITTAL, A.S.BAINS
Rajender Parshad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
S.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.
1. Whether Article 31-A(1)(a) provides an impenetrable protective shield around the provisions of the Haryana Municipal Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1974 against the constitutional attack launched on the basis of Articles 19 and 31 of the Constitution, is the solitary though substantial question arising in this petition.
2. The facts are neither in dispute nor of any great relevance in a matter so patently legal. Nevertheless a passing reference to them is inevitable, though hardly any was made by the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners claim to have purchased agricultural land, now within the municipal limits of Kaithal vide thirteen registered sale-deeds executed during the months of September and October 1971 for a consideration of Rs. 15,520/-. It is averred that the purchased land was in the actual possession of the different shareholders of the village Shamilat Deh who were therefore, entitled to transfer the same. The petitioners claim that thereafter they were put in and continued to be in actual peaceful possession of the land purchased by them.
3. The Haryana Legislature enacted the Haryana Municipal Common Lands (Regulation) Act
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.