JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J. (Oral)

Since all the writ petitions arise from a common thereto orders embodied in Annexure P-7, therefore, all the writ petitions are amenable for being decided through a common verdict.

2. Jagdev Singh son of Mal Singh, Ram Phal son of Nikka Singh, and, Jagdev Singh son of Nikka Singh, all respectively constituted cases bearing Nos.1046/DDPO, 1047/DDPO, and, 1048/DDPO, thus before the learned Collector. The above cases were filed under Section 11 of The Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). In the suit (supra), the plaintiffs claimed the making of a declaratory decree of ownership in their favour in respect of the suit khasra numbers.

3. The learned Collector concerned, through a common order drawn, on 26.10.1998 (Annexure P-4), on the above cases, thus proceeded to decree the plaintiffs' suit, thereby declared them to be owner in possession of the suit property.

4. The basis for making the above decision became founded, upon the factum, that though in the jamabandis pertaining to the suit lands, and, relating to the year 1961, the disputed lands were reflected as Shamlat Deh, and, in the column of ownership, the Gram Panchayat concerned, was reflected to be the owner of the said lands. However, since in the subsequent jamabandis an entry in the column of ownership, thus reflecting Mushtarka Malkan was made thereins. Therefore, it was concluded, especially when there is no evidence existing on record, thus suggestive, that the plaintiffs are Chakotedars over the disputed lands, that thereupon they are entitled to the espoused declaratory decree of title as owners over the disputed lands.

5. Feeling aggrieved from the above, the Gram Panchayat concerned, instituted separate appeals, respectively bearing Nos.32, 34, and, 35 of 1999, before the competent Appellate Authority concerned. The said appeal(s) was decided, on 09.11.2001, and, thereby the competent Appellate Authority, after reversing the assigning of a declaratory decree, thus by the learned Collector concerned, rather proceeded to allow the Gram Panchayat's appeal, hence dismissed the plaintiff's suit.

6. Feeling aggrieved, against the order of the competent Appellate Authority, the petitioners approached this Court through filing CWPs-4855, 4918 and 5080 of 2002. This Court through an order made, on 08.10.2012, set aside the order (supra) of the Appellate Authority, and, remitted the lis to the Director, Rural Development and Panchayat Department, Punjab to decide the appeal afresh, in accordance with law, within three months.

7. The parties appeared before the learned Joint Development Commissioner IRD Punjab, Vikas Bhawan Sector 62 Ajitgarh (Mohali), thus the exercising the powers of Commissioner) (hereinafter referred to as "the Commissioner"). The Commissioner through an order made, on 14.05.2015 (Annexure P-7) again allowed the appeal of the Gram Panchayat concerned, and, dismissed the plaintiff's suit.

8. Plaintiffs are aggrieved from the dismissal of their suit, through (Annexure P-7) by the Commissioner concerned, and, thus cast a challenge thereto, through theirs instituting the instant writ petition(s) before this Court.

9. For brevity, the learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued, that the entries in the jamabandis reflecting the petitioners or their respective predecessors in interest to be Chakotedars over the disputed lands rather are false or fictitious entries. Therefore, he argues that no sanctity, and/or, no presumption of truth is to be assigned thereto. Contrarily, he submits that the presumption of truth, if any, as attachable to the said ent