JUDGMENT

Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

On the request of both the counsels for the parties, both the petitions are taken up together, as both petitions arise from the common dispute.

2. For the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CWP-11471- 2023.

3. The Gram Panchayat, village Dhamoli Majri, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala has filed the present petition seeking quashing of order dated 17.5.2013 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Commissioner, Ambala Division, Ambala (respondent No.1) vide which permission was granted to private respondents No.4 to 13 to harvest the crops and also directed the Asstt. Collector Ist Grade, Naraingarh to provide police protection for enabling the petitioner to cut the trees and harvest the crops. The case is best example where deliberately multiple litigations is generated from an order of status-quo dated 29.3.2023 passed by this Court in CWP No.6840 of 2023 in order to derive undue benefits. Therefore, to settle the dispute once and for all, it is imperative for us to discuss the factual issues in detail.

Factual Matrix

4. The private respondents No. 4 to 13 had earlier approached this Court seeking quashing of the notice(s) under Section 24 (2) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act , 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1994") issued by the petitioner-Gram Panchayat. This Court while adjudicating the legality of notice(s) served under Section 24 (2) of the Act of 1994 held that since the proceedings under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1961') are still pending before the Asstt. Collector Ist Grade concerned, therefore, notice(s) served under Section 24 (2) of the Act of 1994 is illegal and, thus, be quashed. However, it was specifically observed that the Asstt. Collector Ist Grade concerned, before whom petition under Section 7 is pending shall make an objective independent decision without getting influenced of quashing of above notice(s) under Section 24 (2) of the Act of 1994 and decide the eviction petition within a period of three months. Further, specific direction was issued to maintain status-quo as on that day in respect of the disputed land (emphasize specifically).

5. Today. the learned counsel for the petitioner-Gram Panchayat has brought on record certain additional facts that prior to the quashing of the impugned notice(s) under Section 24 (2) of the Act served upon respondents No.4 to 13, the actual physical possession was resumed and this fact was being concealed by the respondents No.4 to 13). He further submitted that in pursuance of the notice dated 17.3.2023 (Annexure P-15), the physical possession was taken on 24.3.2023 in the presence of the Duty Magistrate SDO(C) and officials of BDPO, Sahjadpur, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Village Dhamoli Majri, Girdawars Halqua and Duty Magistrate. He further brought the attention of this Court to the DDR No. 26 dated 24.3.2023 recorded by the police wherein, it is recorded that in the presence of Sh. Pardeep Kumar, SDO, UHVPN, Sahjadpur (Duty Magistrate), in compliance of order No.8262- MA/MC-2 dated 17.3.2023, the possession of the panchayat land was handed over to the Panchayat and the previous occupant i.e. respondents No. 4 to 13 were present on the spot, who raised objection regarding possession proceedings. However, they could not produce any document, therefore, the transfer proceedings were conducted peacefully. Learned counsel for the petitioner further placed reliance upon the compliance report which was submitted by the Duty Magistrate, concerned, to the Deputy Commissioner, Ambala dated 28.3.2023. the relevant extract reads as under:-

"It is intimated that I had been appointed as Duty Magistrate vide your good office memo no 8325/MA/MC-2 dated 22.03.2023 to maintain the law and order during possession of Panchayti land in Gram Panchayat Dhamauli Majri.

In the subject cited matter it is informed that the possession work of Panchayat land has been done