SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(P&H) 1144

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sureshwar Thakur, Kuldeep Tiwari, JJ.
Jai Singh - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. - Respondents - Respondent
CWP-29883 of 2018
Decided On : 17-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Karan Singla, Advocate for the petitioner (in CWP-29883-2018).
Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in remaining cases).
Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Vaneet Soni, Advocate for the respondent-Gram Panchayat.

The significance of tangible evidence and pre-consolidation records in establishing ownership and cultivation rights over disputed lands.

Headnote:

mutation - land dispute - Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 - Section 2(g)(viii)

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners filed suits for declaration before the civil court, which were later declared triable by the Revenue Court. After multiple orders and appeals, the case was remitted back to the Assistant Collector, who dismissed the suits. The subsequent appeals and revisions were also dismissed, leading to the filing of the instant writ petition before the court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found no merit in the writ petitions and dismissed them, maintaining and affirming the impugned orders.

Issues: The issues included the validity of mutation, private partition of the land, cultivation and ownership rights, and the jurisdiction of the court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court rejected the petitioners' submissions, emphasizing the lack of tangible evidence to establish their lawful predecessors in interest and the significance of the pre-consolidation records. The court also highlighted the classification of the lands and the lack of evidence supporting the petitioners' claims.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed, and the impugned orders were maintained and affirmed. No costs were awarded, and all pending applications were disposed of.

SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.

1. Since all the petitions arrive here from a common thereto order. Therefore, they are amenable to be decided through a common verdict.

Factual Background.

2. The petitioners instituted suit for declaration, before the civil Court concerned, in the year 1988, but the Hon'ble Apex Court on a motion being laid before it, rather declared that the said suits were triable by the Revenue Court. Thus, the Assistant Collector, First Grade concerned, decided the suits against the petitioners. The subsequent thereto motions as became drawn by the aggrieved, became also dismissed, thus through (Annexures P-9 to P-11). This Court through an order made on 15.05.1997, upon Civil Writ petition No. 6479 of 1993 (Annexure P-12), after setting aside the above made orders, thus remitted the case to the Assistant Collector, First Grade but with directions to him to decide the lis afresh. However, the Assistant Collector, First Grade concerned, again through an order drawn on 06.01.1998 (Annexure P-13), rejected the plaintiffs suit, besides an appeal, as became reared against the said order, also became dismissed on 24.05.1999. Moreover, the learned Commissioner Ambala Division, through an order made on 20.07.1999 (Annexure P-16), also dismissed the relevant revision petition, as became preferred by the revisionist-plaintiffs.

3. Thereafter, through an order drawn on 23.02.2001, the Financial Commissioner, Haryana remanded the lis to the Assistant Collector concerned. The Assistant Collector, First Grade concerned, through an order drawn on 05.02.2003, again dismissed the plaintiffs suits. On the filing of an appeal against the order (supra), the learned Collector concerned, through an order drawn on 16.07.2003, again remitted the matter to the Assistant Collector First Grade concerned. The Assistant Collector First Grade through an order drawn, on 30.06.2004, decreed the plaintiffs suit, but in an appeal reared thereagainst, thus before the Appellate Authority, by the Gram Panchayat concerned, the latter through an order drawn on 27.10.2004, remitted the lis to the Assistant Collector First Grade concerned. The appellate motion cast against the said remand order was rejected, through an order drawn by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, on 18.05.2005. Through an order drawn on 28.02.2006, the Financial Commissioner, remanded the lis to the Commissioner, Ambala Division. Since the cases were already remanded by the Collector concerned, to the Assistant Collector, therefore, the appeals thus were disposed of by the Commissioner. However, the Gram Panchayat preferred CWP 18802 of 2007, seeking a direction to the Collector, to decide the matter in a time bound manner, thus leading this Court to through an order drawn on 20.12.2010, making a direction upon the Collector, Kurukshetra, to decide the matter within three months. The Collector concerned, through an order drawn on 20.04.2011, dismissed the plaintiffs suits resulting in an appeal being preferred thereagainst, before the Commissioner Ambala Division, who through an order drawn on 14.01.2004, thus remanded the case to the Collector Kurukshetra.

4. However, the Collector Kurukshetra again through, an order drawn on 18.04.2017(Annexure P-20), dismissed the plaintiffs title suits. The appeals reared thereagainst became also dismissed by the Commissioner Ambala Division, thus through an order drawn on 07.02.2018 (Annexure P-21), resulting in the aggrieved, to institute revision petitions, before the Revisional Authority concerned, which through an order drawn thereons on 26.09.2018, rather dismissed the said revision petitions.

5. The above concurrently made dismissal orders, respectively by the Collector concerned, (Annexure P-20), by the appellate authority concerned (Annexure P-21), and by the Revisional Authority concerned (Annexure P-23), brings grievance to the aggrieved therefrom, thus, they are led to make a challenge to the said annexures, through theirs instituting the ins

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top