CWP No.2123 of 2009

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CWP No.2123 of 2009

Date of decision: 09.08.2011

Mangli and others

....Petitioners

Versus

The Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of

Haryana, Development and Panchayats Department and others

....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH

Present: - Mr. Mahavir Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Gaurav Dhir, DAG, Haryana.

1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

*****

ALOK SINGH, J (ORAL)

Petitioners have invoked jurisdiction of this Court under

Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated

29.3.2007 (Annexure P-3) passed by Collector, Sonepat, order dated

5.9.2008 (Annexure P-4) passed by Commissioner, Rohtak Division,

and order dated 10.12.2008 (Annexure P-5) passed by Financial

Commissioner, whereby suit filed by Gram Panchayat/respondent No.4

herein under Section 13-A of the Punjab Village Common Lands

(Regulation) Act, 1961 as applicable to State of Haryana (hereinafter

called as 'the 1961 Act') was decreed and appeals and revision arising

therefrom were dismissed.

The Gram Panchayat has filed suit under Section 13-A inter

alia contending that land in dispute during the consolidation of holdings

CWP No.2123 of 2009

-2-

was reserved for the purpose of Charand and since then same is

continued for the common purpose of Charand; mutation sanctioned in

favour of 'Panna Kalian' pursuant to the judgment of Full Bench in the

case of Jai Singh Vs. State of Haryana dated 18.1.1995 is of no value

after setting aside of the order and judgment dated 18.1.1995 by the

Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 6.8.1998 and thereafter after the

decision of the Full Bench of this Court dated 13.3.2003. Petitioners

herein preferred their written statement contending mutation sanctioned

in favour of the petitioners herein vide order dated 16.5.1997 pursuant to

Full Bench decision dated 18.1.1995 was never disturbed/revoked even

after the remand of the case by Hon'ble Apex Court and fresh decision

of the Full Bench of this Court dated 13.3.2003, therefore, Gram

Panchayat is estopped to challenge the title of the petitioners herein;

further contention is that seldom use for the purpose of Charand does

not change the nature of the suit land; further contended that right from

the very beginning petitioners are in possession and cultivation of the

suit land and are the owners thereof.

Learned trial Court/Collector has framed as many as six issues

and after discussing entire material/evidence, made available on the

record, has decreed the suit of the Gram Panchayat vide judgment and

order dated 29.3.2007 having observed that as per the copy of 'Sharat

Wajib Ul Arj' and in the consolidation proceedings land was kept

reserved for the purpose of Charand, therefore, as per Section 2(g)(i) &

(iii), land in question is a 'Shamlat Deh' and has stood vested in the

Panchayat in view of Section 4(i) of the 1961 Act. Feeling aggrieved,

petitioners preferred an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner,

CWP No.2123 of 2009

-3-

which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 5.9.2008 and

thereafter revision preferred was also came to be dismissed vide

judgment and order dated 10.12.2008. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners

have approached this Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully

perused the record.

Undisputedly, land in question was recorded as 'Shamlat

Panna Kalian Bai Hissa Jail Dar Eighty Shares Chuhar Singh etc.

Khewat No.1 shareholders' and in the column of cultivation 'Khudkast

and Maqbooja Malkan' is recorded; in the column of area and nature,

land in question is described as 'Banjar Qadim Charand & Chahi &

Rosli'. Assistant Collector, IInd Grade, sanctio