IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 14518 of 2011 Date of Decision: 10.08.2011 Paramjit Singh and others ..Petitioners Versus Punjab State and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr. S.S.Rangi, Advocate, for the petitioners. 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) Learned Collector/Divisional Deputy Director, Village Development and Panchayat Officer, Patiala, having observed that the petitioners could not place on record any revenue record to prove that either petitioners or their forefathers were in actual possession of the land in dispute, prior to the appointed day, i.e. January 26th, 1950, has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioners under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulations) Act, 1961 vide order dated December 15th, 2005 (Annexure P/2). The order, Annexure P/2, was upheld by the appellate authority/Divisional Commissioner, vide order dated 8.4.2009 (Annexure P/1). Learned counsel for the petitioners is not able to show any entry in the revenue record showing that the petitioners or their forefathers were in actual possession on the appointed day, i.e. January 26th, 1950. Rather, the revenue entries are against the petitioners. Long standing revenue entries shall be presumed to be correct unless rebutted by cogent evidence. Since the Civil Writ Petition No. 14518 of 2011 -2- .. petitioners failed to rebut the entries in the revenue record by adducing cogent evidence to prove that the petitiones or their forefathers were in possession of the land in question, therefore, the impugned orders passed by the learned Collector and Divisional Commissioner seem to be justified and no interference is called for. Dismissed in limini. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE 10.08.2011 som