Rameshwar Singh Malik J.

Present writ petition is directed against the impugned notice dated 23.5.2016 (Annexure P-7) issued to the petitioners, by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Karnal-respondent No.3, asking them to remove their unauthorised occupation from the Shamlat land, handing over the vacant possession thereof to the respondent-Gram Panchayat, failing which, Gram Panchayat shall initiate proceedings to take the possession with the police help, as per rules.

2. Succinctly put, facts necessary for disposal of the present case, are that the respondent-Gram Panchayat was owner of the land in question. Since the petitioners seem to have started cultivating the land, initially on the basis of lease, term of which had expired and their possession became illegal. They filed a suit for injunction against the respondent-Gram Panchayat by way of civil suit No. 812/91. Gram Panchayat, through its counsel, appeared before the learned civil court and got the statement recorded that plaintiff shall not be dispossessed forcibly, but possession shall be taken only after following due process of law. Having given such undertaking on behalf of the respondent-Gram Panchayat, learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner sought permission to withdraw the civil suit. Accordingly, learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Karnal, vide order dated 20.8.1992 (Annexure P-1), dismissed the suit as withdrawn, directing that defendant shall remain bound by the statement given by the counsel in the court.

3. In compliance of the above said order passed by the learned civil court, respondent-Gram Panchayat filed eviction petition under Sections 2 to 7 of the Haryana Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1972, (‘the Act' for short), vide eviction petition dated 17.8.1994 (Annexure P-3). Petitioners filed their written statement vide Annexure P-4. Parties led their respective evidence. After hearing both the parties and going through the evidence brought on record, Collector, Karnal, vide his order dated 28.10.1998 (Annexure P-5), accepted the eviction petition of the Gram Panchayat and ordered ejectment of the petitioners from the land in question.

4. Petitioners filed their appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak, vide order dated 20.9.2002 (Annexure P-6). Dissatisfied, petitioners approached this Court by way of CWP No. 2256 of 2003, which was also dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.2.2003. Since the petitioners did not file any SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the above said order dated 11.2.2003, said order became final between the parties and the eviction order dated 28.10.1998 (Annexure P-5) became absolute.

5. However, it seems that during all these more than 13 years, petitioners somehow managed to keep their illegal possession intact. When the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Karnal-respondent No.3 issued impugned notice (Annexure P-7) to the petitioners, they filed their reply dated 8.8.2016 (Annexure P-8), requesting respondent No.3 to withdraw the same. Simultaneously, petitioners have approached this Court by way of instant writ petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while placing reliance on the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 19 of its judgment in Daryao and others v. State of U.P. and others, AIR 1961 SC 1457, submits that since the above said order dated 11.2.2003 passed by a Division Bench of this Court, dismissing earlier writ petition of the petitioners in limine, was a non speaking order, it will not operate either as estoppel or res judicata against the petitioners in filing and maintaining the present writ petition. He places reliance on an order dated 13.10.2015 passed by this Court in CWP No. 7123 of 2011 (Krishan Pal and others v. The Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak and others), to contend that the impugned ejectment orders (Annexures P-5 and P-6) were illegal, because th