IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A. No. 148 of 2009 Date of decision : 04-05-2009 Rampal etc. .....Appellants State of Haryana etc. .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR Present : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate for the Caveator. ***** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. It is an admitted position that the Eviction Petition was decided in favour of the Gram Panchayat by the Assistant Collector Ist Grade in the year 1994. The appeal and revision against the said order of ejectment were dismissed. S.L.P filed against the eviction orders has also been dismissed. The order of ejectment has attained finality. Meanwhile, the appellants have filed a suit under Section 13-A of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as `the Act') before the Collector, Panipat, seeking declaration that the land, in dispute, is owned by the proprietors of the Village and the same does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. During the pendency of the suit under Section 13-A of the Act, the petitioner filed application under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 C.P.C seeking interim stay restraining the panchayat from leasing out this land L.P.A. No. 148 of 2009 -2- which as of today stand declined. The short ground raised by learned counsel for the appellant is that the Gram Panchayat has no title or interest and the learned Single Judge, while dismissing his writ petition, had wrongly concluded that the possession was still with the Gram Panchayat. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having perused the pleadings before us, we find no ground to interfere with the well reasoned order passed by the learned Single Judge. Without going into the question as to whether the possession is with the Gram Panchayat or the petitioner, it is clear that the order of ejectment has attained finality uptil the Hon'ble Apex Court. In view of this, the possession if in the hands of appellant is illegal. Thus, to restrain the Gram Panchayat from leasing out the land till the decision of the suit under Section 13-A of the Act will not serve any purpose and is, in fact, against the interest of the villagers and public. In fact, as held by the Commissioner, Rohtak Division, Rohtak, in his order dated 12-07-2007, the possession of the said land is in the possession of Gram Panchayat and all the decisions of the Revenue Court and Civil Court till today regarding khasra No.75/27 measuring 28 kanals 9 marlas are in favour of Gram Panchayat, Hathwala and, therefore, the Gram Panchayat is fully competent to lease out the said land. In view of the above, we find no merit in the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the appellants and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) JUDGE (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE 04-05-2009 gurpreet