JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J. (Oral)

The respondents No.8 to 13 are alleged, in the instant writ petition, to make encroachment(s) upon land, owned and possessed by the Gram Panchayat concerned. The above made encroachment(s), resulted in an order of eviction being passed, by the competent authority concerned, as envisaged in the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1973' for short).

2. It is not disputed amongst the learned counsels for the appearing litigants before this Court, that the said order of eviction, after acquiring a binding, and, a conclusive effect, resulted in the drawing of warrants of possession, and, which becomes appended as Annexure P-1, to the instant writ petition. Furthermore, it is also not disputed amongst the learned counsels for the appearing litigants before this Court, that the warrants of possession (supra) rather resulted, as unfolded by Annexure P-2, in their completest execution against the encroachers concerned.

3. Be that as it may, subsequent to the completest execution of Annexure P-1, rather through Annexure P-2, yet the above referred to private respondents, in the instant writ petition, are alleged to re-enter upon the Panchayat land(s), and, which resulted in a letter, as enclosed in Annexure P- 3, becoming addressed by the residents of the village concerned, to the Special Secretary, Government of Punjab (hereinafter referred to as 'Special Secretary' for short).

4. It is fairly stated at the bar, by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the present petitioner was not a party in the petition, whereunder, the above stated binding, and, conclusive order of eviction became passed. Therefore, prima facie, then the petitioner herein may not have the locus standi to ask, that Annexure P-3 be directed to be actioned, upon, by the Special Secretary. Nonetheless, since the private respondents (supra) have purportedly resumed possession of the Panchayat land(s), thereupon, in the event of such re-encroachment(s) being allegedly made by the encroachers, thus Section 5 of the Act of 1973, provisions whereof become extracted hereinafter, is the apt recoursable remedy. When the said extracted provisions, empowers "any person", term whereof does but when include even the petitioner, who also rather may be, aggrieved by such re-encroachments, to draw a motion thereunder, before the competent authority, rather post the makings of the completest and effective execution of Annexure P-1, through Annexure P-2. Moreover so, but irrespective of the fact, that in the basic petition, which resulted in the drawing of Annexure P-1, and there afters in the drawing of Annexure P-2, rather the present petitioner was not a party therein. Thus, the present petitioner, who may have some right, title or interest, on the Panchayat land(s) rather in terms of the Wazib Ul Arz, therefore, he becomes ably competent to institute the present writ petition, but, under Section 11 of the Act of 1973 before the learned Collector concerned.

"5. Eviction of unauthorized persons:- (1) If, after considering the cause if any, shown by any person in pursuance of a notice under section 4 and any evidence he may produce in support of the same and after giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the Collector is satisfied that the public premises are in unauthorized occupation, the Collector may make an order of eviction, for reasons to be recorded therein, the Collector may make an order of eviction, for reasons to be recorded therein, directing that the public premises shall be vacated, on such date as may be specified in the order, by all persons who may be in occupation thereof or any pa