Back
SURESHWAR THAKUR, HARSH BUNGER
Jagta Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
What is the legality of eviction under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 in relation to claimed lease or adverse possession? What is the court's stance on proof required to establish lease, ownership, or adverse possession in Shamilat Deh lands under the 1961 Act? What is the effect of alleged repugnancy between the 1961 Act and other Acts on the maintainability of eviction petitions?
Key Points: - The petitioners were evicted under Section 7 of the 1961 Act; eviction upheld due to lack of prima facie evidence of lease or adverse possession (!) (!) . - The court requires demonstrating prima facie title/possession; mere claims of lease or adverse possession without supporting records are insufficient (no material showing government allotment/lease) (!) (!) . - The court discusses maintainability of eviction petitions, repugnancy between acts, and held that petitioners failed to prove their rights under the 1961 Act; eviction orders affirmed (Annexures P-1 and P-2) (!) (!) . - The judgment references prior determinations that repugnancy between Central Evacuee Property Act and Punjab Act is resolved in favor of Punjab Act’s prevailment for Shamlat-deh lands within Punjab (!) - (!) . - The appellate and constitutional avenues under Articles 226/227 were pursued but petition was dismissed, sustaining eviction (!) (!) . - The petitioners’ reliance on Hans Raj’s case was rejected; no material to prove Section 4(3) protections or government allotment (!) . - The court clarifies the procedural pathway under Section 7(1) and its provisos, emphasizing the need for prima facie evidence of title before proceeding to possess Shamilat Deh lands (!) - (!) . - The matter is disposed with eviction orders upheld and no relief granted to petitioners (!) - (!) .
Judgment
Mr. Harsh Bunger, J.
Petitioners have filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the eviction order dated 18.03.1986 (Annexure P-1) passed by the District Development and Panchayat Officer (here-in-after called as ‘DDPO-cum-Collector’), Ludhiana, upon an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as ‘the 1961 Act’) filed by respondent No.3-Gram Panchayat, Rahimabad Kalan, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana.
Petitioners further seek quashing of order dated 28.11.1986 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Joint Director, Panchayat, Punjab, Chandigarh (exercising the powers of Commissioner under the Act, 1961); whereby, the appeal preferred by them against the eviction order dated 18.03.1986 has been dismissed.
2. Briefly, Gram Panchayat Village Rahimabad Kalan, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, filed an eviction petition under Section 7 of the 1961 Act against the petitioners seeking their eviction from the land in dispute on the plea that the Gram Panchayat is the owner of land in question and the petitioners herein are in
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
