The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with statutory provisions and natural justice principles in eviction proceedings, mandating that execution petitions be filed to allow for objections from judgment-debtors.

Judgment

Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.

CM-21495-CWP-2023

Allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions. Annexure P-12 is taken on record.

CWP-28300-2023

1. Status report by way of an affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, and, the same is taken on record.

2. The facts as orally stated before this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioners, and, which are not disputed by the learned State counsel, besides which are of dire importance for making an adjudication, upon the instant writ petition, are as follows:-

a) That a petition under Section 7 the The Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1961”) became instituted before the learned Collector concerned, by the Gram Panchayat concerned. The said petition became instituted on 08.07.2011.

b) A decision on the said petition was made on 14.09.2023.

3. The present petitioners in respect of the very same lands, in respect whereof became filed a petition under Section 7 of the Act of 1961, thus instituted on 31.01.2013, before the learned Collector concerned, but subsequent to the institution of the said petition, rather a petition under Section 11 of the Act of 1961. The said suit was dismissed through an order made threons, on 25.05.2023.

4. That an appeal against the said decision has been filed, at the instance of the aggrieved before the learned Commissioner concerned. A perusal of the zimni orders, as became produced today before this Court, by the learned counsel for the petitioners, discloses, that though the present petitioners also filed an application seeking stay of the operation of the dismissal verdict, as became recorded by the learned Collector concerned, upon the suit (supra), yet no decision becoming made thereons. However, a perusal of the apposite zimni orders, as, made on 07.11.2023, discloses, that the learned Commissioner concerned, had after issuing notice to the parties concerned, proceeded to summon or requisition the records of the Collector concerned, who had non-suited the plaintiffs, who are the petitioners before this Court.

5. The decision, on the eviction petition, was made on 15.11.2023, thus subsequent to the non-suiting of the present petitioners, on 25.05.2023, by the learned Collector concerned. Consequently, the learned Collector concerned, proceeded to execute the decision made on 14.09.2023, on the eviction petition, cast under Section 7 of the Act of 1961, through his drawing the impugned warrants of possession, which are appended with the instant petition as Annexure P-9.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS

I. Learned counsel for the petitioners, has vigorously submitted before this Court, that even though as is evident on a reading of the reply on affidavit furnished to the instant petition, by the respondent concerned, that rapat possession, has been assumed over the petition lands, by the Gram Panchayat concerned, thus in pursuance to Annexure P-9. However, he submits that still physical possession of the disputed lands, rather is with the present petitioners.

II. He also makes a submission before this Court, that the warrants of possession, even if they became symbolically executed through, the aegis of the police, as well as through the aegis of the executing officers concerned, yet the said executed warrants of possession, rather are not vindicable, especially in the wake of the learned Commissioner concerned, requisitioning the records from the learned Collector concerned, upon, his being seized with the relevant statutory appeal, besides, his posting the said appeal for 06.12.2023. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits, that even if the decision recorded, on the eviction petition, by the learned Collector concerned, became unchallenged, and, may be for want of challenge being thrown thereto, at the instance of the judgment-debtor concerned, the said verdict of eviction was enforceable.

III. However, he further submit