JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

Through the instant petition, the petitioners seek that a mandamus be made, upon the respondents concerned, to not impermissibly change the user of the "gaddha khad", as purportedly carried on petition land i.e. Rect. No. 52, Killa No. 5/1/6 measuring 6 kanals 3 marlas, as the said "gaddha khad", became reserved as such, in the consolidation plan.

2. Admittedly, a revenue entry does exist qua the said gaddha khad. The reservation of the petition land, for the above purpose, was made in the finalized consolidation scheme, as became prepared by the authorities concerned. Therefore, the said gaddha khad, when became reserved for the benefit of the entire village proprietary body, thus, it was not amenable for becoming used for any other purpose, but subject to the said gaddha khad, for some validly drawn reasons becoming shifted to some other site.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends, that no utilization plan became prepared for the lawful shifting of the above gaddha khad, from the petition land to some other site.

4. However, for the reasons to be assigned hereinafter, the above argument is rejected. The initial reason for rejecting the above made argument, becomes bedrocked, upon the factum, that the Panchayat concerned, passed a resolution for the shifting the gaddha khad, from the petition land to some other land, located away from the abadi, and, the said resolution resulted in the drawings of Annexure P-5 by the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad. Though in Annexure P-5, there is a speaking that the proposal concerned, be decided only within the purview of Sub Rule 2 Clause XII of Rule 3 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, but subsequently through the drawings of Annexure P-4, the gaddha khad, as became raised on the petition land, became shifted to some other land.

5. However, the shifting of the gaddha khad from the petition land onto some other lands, which are also owned by the Gram Panchayat concerned, did occur in pursuance to an apposite exchange. Moreover, since the reply on affidavit, furnished to the writ petition on behalf of co-respondents No. 1 to 3, does make speaking(s), that the resolution bearing No. 9 dated 8.9.2016, hence proposing the exchange of the petition land also with the lands of the Gram Panchayat concerned, whereons, now the gaddha khad becomes shifted to, was made on an objective consideration of the said necessity arising, as the recorded manure pit, was located in the closest proximity of the abadi, and, that there is a grave endangerment of diseases spreading to the persons housed in the abodes raised on the abadi concerned. The above objectively drawn reason, is made on a deep, and, keenest application of mind to the requisite necessity qua the shifting of the "gaddha khad" from the petition land, to some other lands. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioners cannot argue, that the above drawn reason is lacking or is wanting in any vigour, as no evidence is adduced in the said regard, before this Court nor was adduceable here, as then it would have become a contested question of fact, and, was not amenable for being determined in writ proceedings.

6. In addition, it is averred in the reply on affidavit, furnished to the writ petition, that on the petition land, a community centre has been raised. Therefore, when though in the consolidation scheme, the petition land though became reserved for the benefit of the Panchayat, but when the said gaddha khad, is lawfully shifted to some other site, whereas on the petition land, a community centre becomes raised. Thus, the petition lands are obviously put to an apt user for the benefit of the entire village proprieta