The judgment establishes the principle that claims of exclusion from 'shamlat deh' under the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 must satisfy specific criteria, and abuse of process of law can lead to dismissal of the suit.

JUDGMENT

Anil Kshetarpal, J. - The plaintiff-appellant has assailed the correctness of concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below while dismissing his suit for grant of decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in his peaceful possession over land comprised in khasra no.450 and 303 situated in village Jhinjri, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar. The plaintiff also prayed for a decree of possession in the alternative.

2. The defendant-Gram Panchayat contessted the suit while claiming that the land in dispute is shamlat deh, reserved for common purpose. It has been asserted that the land in dispute is reserved as grazing ground. Both the courts as noticed above have dismissed the suit.

3. After having heard learned counsel for the appellant at length, this Court is of the considered opinion that the suit is an abuse of the process of law. It is not in dispute that the plaintiff's father had filed a petition under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 before the Collector. All the authorities decided against the plaintiff's father, who further challenged the correctness of the aforesaid orders before the High Court. A Division Bench while disposing of CWP-20626-2014 on 18.11.2015 (Ex D3), held as under:-

"(7) It may be seen that the controversy pertains to new Khasra Nos.303(0-10) & 450(7-9) i.e. old khasra No.1524(4-15) & 1524(5-2) [Total (9-17)]. As per the revenue record produced by the petitioner (P1 to P4), shamlat deh (self-share/ancestral) is duly recorded as its owner in the jamabandis for the year 1918-19, 1934-35, 1942-43 and 1955-56. In the column of 'cultivator' in the jamabandi for the year 1934-35 onwards, old Khasra No.1524 is duly recorded as 'charand' (grazing ground) and 'gair mumkin beer' (forest area). The petitioner's father Durga Das is recorded to be in cultivating possession as 'gair mourusi' (tenant at will) only. Similar are the entries in the jamabandis for the year 1942-43 and 1946-47. The Tehsildar has verified that jamabandi for the year 1951-52 is not available. In the light of the revenue entries in the jamabandi immediate preceding 1951-52, it cannot be said that the petitioner or his father got the shamlat land partitioned and brought under individual cultivating possession before 26.01.1950 so as to get such land excluded from 'shamlat deh' under Section 2(g)(iii) of the 1961 Act.

(8) It is not in dispute and has been stated on oath by AC 1st Grade-cum-Tehsildar, Anandpur Sahib that consolidation work in village Jhinjari started in the year 1960-61 and after completion thereof, the first Jamabandi was prepared in the year 1967-68 (R5). In the consolidation, old khasra No.1219 has been converted into new Khasra no.303(0-10) whereas old khasra No.1524 has been assigned new khasra No.450(7-9). Both the new khasra Nos.303 and 450 are also reserved for common purposes of the village as 'charand' and 'gair mumkin khad'(pit for natural manure). These very entries are clearly depicted in the jamabandis (R4 &R5) as well as in the jamabandis for the year 1975-76, 1980-81, 1985-86, 1995-96, 2000-01 and 2005-06 (P7 to P12) placed on record by the petitioner. The above-stated unimpeachable and consistently maintained official record belies the petitioner's claim that these khasra Nos. were/are in his individual cultivating possession.

(9) Least there remains any doubt in respect of the common use of the land, the petitioner himself has placed on record the relevant extracts of Consolidation Scheme (P14) of the village and its column No.2 pertains to "Right of grazing cattles in shamlat land". As per the tabulated details of Khasra Nos. reserved as charand, khasra No.1524 (i.e. the old number) is duly included in the land reserved for the said common purpose.

(10) Further, the petitioner has staked his claim in respect of two new khasra Nos.303 & 450. The corresponding old khasra No. of 303 was 1219. It is nowhere the petitioner's