Parkash Singh vs Joint Development Commissioner, Punjab

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2013 Supreme(P&H) 933

S.S.SARON, RAJIVE BHALLA, S.P.BANGARH
Parkash Singh – Appellant
Versus
Joint Development Commissioner, Punjab – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Petitioners:Mr. P.K. Gupta, Advocate and Ms. Priya Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Vishal Goel, Advocate, Mr. H.S. Sidhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab, Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocate, Mr. Ankur Soni, Advocate, for Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate.
For the Respondent No.3 in Mr. Rishav Jain, Advocate, for Mr. Arun Jindal,
CWP No.2318 of 2002:Advocate, Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate.
For the Respondent No.2 in CWP Nos.12034 Mr. Ashok Singla, Advocate and Mr. Ravish Bansal,
of 2002, 6159 of 2002 and 7493 of 2002:Advocate and Mr. Aakash Singla, Advocate.
For the Respondent-Gram Panchayat in Mr. S.S.Salar, Advocate and Ms. Maninderpreet
CWP Nos.10246, 11261, 11638, 11644 of 2009:Kaur, Advocate.
For the Petitioners in CWP No.6074:Mr. Jatinder Singla, Advocate.
Mr. M.S.Bedi, Advocate, Mr. Sarjit Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jagdev Singh, Advocate.
Mr. Arun Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Rajive Bhalla, J.:- By way of this order, we shall answer a reference made by a Hon’ble Division Bench. An extract from the reference reads as follows:-

“1. Whether a Director Consolidation, exercising power under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 can decide whether land vests or does not vest in a Gram Panchayat?

2. If answer to the first question is in the negative, then whether an order passed by a Director Consolidation, determining ownership of a Gram Panchayat, affirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court operates as res-judicata in a subsequent petition, filed under Section 11 of the Act?

3. Whether Section 13-B of the Act empowers the Collector, exercising jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Act, to disregard an order passed by the Director Consolidation, that has been affirmed by the High Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

4. Whether a plea that the order passed by the Director Consolidation was obtained by fraud can be raised after the order has been affirmed by the High Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court?

In addition to the questions framed, ancillary issues relating to merger of orders passed by Direc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2013 Supreme(P&H) 933

S.S.SARON, RAJIVE BHALLA, S.P.BANGARHParkash Singh – AppellantVersusJoint Development Commissioner, Punjab – Respondent

Cases Referred (7)

S.S.SARON, RAJIVE BHALLA, S.P.BANGARH
Parkash Singh – Appellant
Versus
Joint Development Commissioner, Punjab – Respondent