1

CWP-16236-2020 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-16236-2020 (O&M)

Date of Decision: January 25, 2023

SABIR AND OTHERS

...... Petitioners

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

..... Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE

Present:

Ms. Pratula Sethi, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Amit Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. S.P. Chahar, Advocate for respondent No. 3.

****

LISA GILL, J.

Petitioners have filed this writ petition being aggrieved of their

ejectment from the land in question on an application/petition under Section

7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 [now

Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 as notified on

05.04.2021 (for short – ‘1961 Act’)] vide order dated 30.09.2016 passed by

learned Assistant Collector First Grade, Sonepat.

Brief facts, as pleaded in the writ petition, are that the

petitioners filed application dated 17.05.1994 before the learned Assistant

Collector 2^nd Grade, Sonipat for correction of Girdawari regarding land

measuring 181 kanals 10 marlas as described in the writ petition. Plea taken

RITU SHARMA

2023.01.31 16:59

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

2

CWP-16236-2020 (O&M)

in this application seeking correction of khasra girdawaries was that the

petitioners had taken land on lease from the proprietors since three years

prior thereto. It was stated that mutation of land in dispute was sanctioned in

favour of the Gram Panchayat, however, land was being cultivated by the

petitioners having been taken on lease from the proprietors of the land, who

were in fact owners of said land recorded as Hasab Rasad Raqba Khewat

and that they were in possession thereof, thus, girdawaries should be

corrected. The Assistant Collector 2^nd Grade vide order dated 12.06.1997

while concluding that the petitioners were in possession of the property in

question, directed correction of khasra girdawari.

Petitioners thereafter filed suit for permanent injunction against

the respondent - Gram Panchayat, again with the claim that they had taken

the said land on lease on yearly rent of Rs.50/- per killa in June 1991 from

the proprietary body of the village and that mutation of the land in question

being entered in favour of the Gram Panchayat, was irrelevant and

ineffective qua their rights. Gram Panchayat was proceeded exparte. Suit

was decreed while restraining the Gram Panchayat from interfering in the

possession of plaintiffs over the suit property illegally or forcibly, except in

due course of law.

Another suit for permanent injunction was filed by the

petitioners against one Pale son of Dhara, yet again with the plea that land in

dispute had been taken on yearly rent of Rs.50/- per acre in June 1991 and

that plaintiffs were in possession of the suit property as lessee alongwith

Mange Ram and Ram Saran. In this case too, respondent Pale, was

proceeded exparte and the suit decreed while finding the petitioners to be in

possession of the suit property.

RITU SHARMA

2023.01.31 16:59

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

3

CWP-16236-2020 (O&M)

Petition under Section 7 of the 1961 Act was filed by the Gram

Panchayat against the petitioners on 17.02.2016. Ejectment proceedings

were contested by the petitioners, taking the plea that land was of shamlat

thola with its proprietors being the owner. They claimed to be its lessees and

in possession of the land in question since twelve (12) years prior to

09.01.1954. However, Assistant Collector First Grade, Sonipat vide order

dated 30.09.2016 while concluding that petitioners were in unauthorised

occupation of Gram Panchayat land directed their ejectment alongwith

Mange Ram. It was held that no evidence had been led nor any document

brought on r