IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that land used for religious purposes does not fall under Shamlat Deh, affirming the rights of the religious institution over the land.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.

Dera Tumbi Parkash, village Roorki, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib through its Mohtmin Sher Singh Chela Sewa Ram resident of village Roorki, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib instituted against the Gram Panchayat Rurki, Tehsil and District Fatehgarh Sahib, thus a declaratory suit before the Collector/DDPO, Fatehgarh Sahib, whereby the petitioner (supra), claimed the rendition of a declaratory decree vis-a-vis the suit land. The Collector concerned, made a common verdict dated 28.2.1995 (Annexure P-6), upon suit (supra) bearing File No. (11) 107/DDPO, instituted on 23.1.1995, and, also upon the suit filed by Gram Panchayat village Roorkee, bearing file No. (7) 156/DDPO, instituted on 29.2.1993. Through the common verdict (supra), the suit filed by Dera Tambi Parkash became dismissed, and, the suit filed by Gram Panchayat village Roorkee, thus became decreed.

2. In sequel, excepting two biswas of land, whereons a samadh was existing, and, to which obeisance was paid by the public, the other lands, thus in the illegal, and, unauthorized possession of one Sher Singh, and, one Surinder Singh residents of village Roorkee, thus obviously were declared to be owned by the Gram Panchayat concerned.

3. The making of Annexure P-6 caused grievance to the plaintiff i.e. Dera Tumbi Parkash, and, resulted in an appeal bearing No. 80/95 becoming instituted before the Joint Development Commissioner (Punjab) (Exercising the powers of Commissioner). On the said appeal, the appellate authority through Annexure P-7, after reversing Annexure P-6 rather proceeded to accord the espoused declaratory relief to the plaintiff/appellant.

4. Resultanly Annexure P-7 caused grievance to the Gram Panchayat concerned, and, led it to institute thereagainst the instant writ petition before this Court.

5. When the instant writ petition came up for hearing before this Court on 28.7.1997, this Court after dismissing the writ petition, proceeded to affirm Annexure P-7. The said decision, as made on 28.7.1997, upon, the instant writ petition, is ad verbatim extracted hereinafter.

“This writ petition has been filed against the orderof the joint Development Commissioner holding the disputed land to be belonging to the Dera. After discussing the entire evidence, it has been held that the land in dispute is not shamilat deh and that exception in Section 2(g) of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act does apply to the facts of the present case. The findings recorded by the Joint Development Commissioner read as under:-

“After hearing the ld. Counsel for the appellant, I agree with her contention. The Gram Panchayat has not been able to show as to how this land vests in them as Shamlat Deh. It is beyond the scope of definition of Shamlat Deh as contained in Section 2(g). In fact, this land comes under exception(ix) as it is a religious place. The land is Shamlat Deh Hasab Rasad Zar Khewat of the nature of Banjar Qadim and not used for any common purposes. This land will not vest in Gram Panchayat. The ownership of this land changed in 1971-72 but no satisfactory explanation is coming why this change of ownership took place. It is a place where thousands of people come on every purnima. The order of the collector that the Dera is entitled to only two biswas is probably wrong. The land attached to the Smadh cannot and should not be separated. It is natural that people visit this place and the area around serves the devotees who come on different modes of transportation. Then the area around may be serving to grow crops etc. for running common kitchen (Langar). The Dera is in existence since the year 1947. No proof has come on record if at any time the land was put on auction or used for common purpose.”

In addition to the aforementioned finding, the learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has read out before us the statement of certain devotees to the effect that functions are held on the disputed land which belongs to Dera. The findin