JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J. (Oral)

The petitioners aggrieved from the making of echoings in Annexure P-14. In Annexure P-14, there are references, to the institution of CWPs No. 1973, 3536, 3538, 3539 of 2010 and 24018 of 2011, before this Court, and, also there are reference thereins, that on the said writ petitions, the hereinafter extracted directions were passed:-

"In the meanwhile the respondents shall ensure that land belonging to Gram Panchayat, land reserved for common purposes and recorded as "Shamlat Deh" and Jumla Mustarka Malkan are not sold or transferred in any manner.

Besides this, you might have read that in another case, the Hon'ble Court has appointed a tribunal headed by Sh.Kuldip Singh, retd. Judge of Supreme Court, which will enquire into Govt/Panchayati/Jumla Mustarka Malkan etc. lands regarding illegal distribution/sale of such lands.

Keeping in view the order of the Hon'ble Court, till further orders the sale deeds regarding the Gram Panchayat land, the land reserved for common purposes, the lands recorded as shamlat deh or Jumla Mustarka Malkan in the revenue record or which might have been recorded so at any point of time, or the land once recorded in the name of Govt., be not registered. If earlier any such sale deed is registered, then mutation be not sanctioned.

The above said directions be immediately got notified for strict compliance by the officers subordinate and under control of you."

2. However, it is fairly stated at the bar by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners that SLP bearing No.24518/2012 as became directed against the order (Supra), as became passed by this Court in, CWPs No.1973, 3536, 3537, 3538 and 3539 of 2010, though is still pending, but he also further stated, at the bar, that the stay as was granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the operation of the hereinafter extracted order rather been vacated. Therefore, believing the above made statement by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, this Court can, thus, prima facie construe that the directions contained in the said writ petition do acquire force.

3. However, it is fairly stated at the bar by the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, that the appointment of Justice Kuldeep Singh (Retd.) Judge of the Supreme Court as Head of the Tribunal hence for making an enquiry into Govt./Panchayat/Jumla Mustarka Malkan etc. lands regarding illegal distribution/sale of such lands rather is no longer functional.

4. However, it appears from a reading of order drawn on 9.2.2016, that, the Tribunal headed by Justice Kuldeep Singh (Retd.) had prepared, and, also submitted its report to the State Government, and, the said report is under consideration, and, is in the process of implementation.

5. The writ petitioners had earlier instituted CWP-25817 of 2014, seeking quashing of the letter dated 30.5.2012. A reading of the operative part of the verdict, as drawn in the said writ petition by this Court, and, which becomes extracted hereinafter, imminently discloses that this Court had without expressing any views on the merits of the said writ petition, had proceeded to dispose of the petition (Supra) with a direction to the State Government, to consider the petition as a representation of the petitioners, and, also made a further direction qua consideration of their claims but keeping in view all the relevant factors. It is fairly stated at the bar, by the learned counsel appearing for the contesting litigants, that the above consideration order, as became made on petition (Supra) rather has remained unchallenged. Therefore, the consideration order, as became passed by this Court on petition (Supra),