CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18513 OF 2007 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: AUGUST 02, 2011 Paramjit Singh and another .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. B. S. Sewak, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. N.D.S.Mann, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for the State. Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners have challenged the order passed by Joint Development Commissioner, exercising the powers of Commissioner, setting-aside the order passed by District Development and Panchayat Officer (for short, “DDPO”) exercising the powers of Collector, by holding that the land belongs to Gram Panchayat and possession of the petitioners was illegal over the land in dispute. The CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18513 OF 2007 :{ 2 }: Commissioner, thus, has allowed the application filed by the Panchayat under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) and has directed eviction of the petitioners from the suit land. The petitioners claimed that they, through their predecessor-in-interest, are in occupation of the land for the last 100 years. One Hamira was the eldest who was followed by his son, Nissa Ram and further by Mehar Singh, Bawa Singh and Rugha. The petitioners, thus, claim to be in possession much prior to 1913-14. The land is recorded as shamlat deh hasab rasad zar khewat and in possession of the proprietors of the village. One Ram Rakha was the predecessor of the petitioners and he alongwith others was recorded to be in possession of this land as per jamabandi for the year 1913- 14, 1928-29, 1932-33, 1936-37. After death of Ram Rakha, the land was recorded in favour of his wife, Preeto. Preeto married one Bawa Singh after death of Ram Rakha. On the basis of pedigree-table, the petitioners claimed that the land ultimately came to Ranjit Singh. On 12.7.1997, the land owned by Preeto wife of Bawa Singh father of Ranjit Singh was given to Paramjit Singh by way of family settlement. Copy of this exchange is on record as Annexure P- 7. On the basis of family settlement and the exchange, the jamabandies were recorded accordingly. During her life time, Preeto had to initiate proceedings under Section 11 of the Act against Gram Panchayat on 20.8.1982 and the Collector, Ropar vide his order dated 26.8.1987 held Preeto to be in possession of the land in CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18513 OF 2007 :{ 3 }: dispute through her predecessor-in-interest. Application filed by the Gram Panchayat under Section 7 of the Act against Preeto was dismissed. Gram Panchayat had again filed an application under Section 7 of the Act on 25.8.2005. While deciding this application, the DDPO-cum-Collector has held that the land is neither shamlat deh or falls under the definition of shamlat deh as was never used for common purpose. He has also observed that Preeto had already been declared as owner of the land. Aggrieved against this order, the Gram Panchayat preferred an appeal before Commissioner, who has now set-aside the order passed by DDPO-cum-Collector. The petitioners have, therefore, filed this writ petition to challenge the said order. The respondents have filed reply alleging that the petitioners have concealed material facts. Pedigree table produced showing Ranjit Singh to be son of Ram Rakha and not that of Bawa Singh is termed as wrong. It is, therefore, urged that the petitioners are not related to Ranjit Singh and so, the family settlement by him would be invalid. Concededly, the petitioners are claiming their rights through Smt.Preeto. She has claimed rights over this suit land being widow of Sh.Ram Rakha. As per the record, Ram Rakha was in possession of this land as Garmarusi. The petitioners claims that Preeto, being legally weeded wife, acquired rights of Ram Rakha on his death. After death of Ram Rakha, Preeto had married with Bawa Singh. Bawa Singh is stated to be a grand father of the petitioners. It is on this basis, Ranjit Singh had claimed the estate of Preeto after CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18513 OF 2007 :{ 4 }: her death. The Commissioner has rightly observed that at best the petitioners would acquire the rights, which were possessed by Preeto, though they certainly are not the legal heirs of Ram Rakha. The Collector has also observed that Garmarusi rights are not heritable by hereditary and has made following observations in this regard:- “Not heritable, not holding by hereditary descent, not inherited without the right of occupancy non-ancestral.” The petitioners, on the other hand, had basically relied upon the earlier order passed under Section 7 of the Act in favour of Preeto. The factual position that the petitioners are off-springs of Bawa Singh and not of Ram Rakha and Preeto is not disputed. That being so, the counsel could not justify how the rights of Preeto would pass on the petitioners. The petitioners are not forming part of the proprietary body of the village. The Commissioner has also rightly observed that principle of resjudi-cata is not applicable to summary proceedings under Section 7 of the Act and earlier order passed under Section 7 of the Act would not have any effect on the present order. In fact, the petitioners had conceded that they had purchased this land from the descendants of Preeto. There is a valid justification on the part of the Commissioner to interfere in the view taken by the DDPO-cum-Collector and he has rightly accepted the appeal filed by the Gram Panchayat. The contempt Petition No.1937 of 2011 filed by the Gram Panchayat alleging violation of the interim order passed by this Court may not now be require to be adjudicated upon in view of the above CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18513 OF 2007 :{ 5 }: order passed in the writ petition. Thus, the contempt petition as also the writ petition are dismissed. August 02, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE