CWP No.8231 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.8231 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.2.2010 Jagpal Singh and others .....Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Mr. Sanjeev Manrai, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Sahu, AAG, Punajb for respondents no.1 to 3. Mr. O.P. Nagpal, Advocate for respondents no.4 o 7. Ms. Malkiat Mann, Advocate for respondent no.7. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) CM No.1760 of 2010 C.M. is allowed. Document dated 24.1.2010 (Annexure P-8) is taken on record. CWP No.8231 of 2008 The petitioners pray for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing orders dated 12.12.2007 and 13.9.2005, passed by the Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), exercising the powers of the Commissioner and the Collector,/Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, Patiala. The Gram Panchayat, Rohar Jagir Block Bhunerheri, Tehsil and Distt. Patiala, filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village CWP No.8231 of 2008 2 Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 seeking the petitioners' ejectment from a Gair Mumkin Pond. The petitioners opposed this prayer by asserting that the land does not form a part of the village pond and as a large number of houses have been constructed on this land, the petition should be dismissed. The Collector/Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, Patiala, considered the pleadings, appraised the evidence held that though the land in dispute is a gair mumkin pond but as the petitioners have constructed a house, it will be not in public interest to demolish it. The Gram Panchayat should, therefore, recover the cost of the land, as per rates to be determined by the Collector. Though, the Gram Panchayat did not file an appeal, respondents no.4 to 6 filed an appeal. The Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), exercising the powers of the Commissioner under the Act, accepted the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Collector by holding that as the petitioners have constructed a house in a gair mumkin pond that belongs to the Gram Panchayat and, therefore, ordered their ejectment from the land in dispute. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been in possession, of land in dispute, for the last more than 50 years,as the house was constructed by their forefathers. This apart, the land is no longer a gair mumkin pond, as a large number of other residents of the village have raised construction. It is, therefore, prayed that the Gram Panchayat should be directed to accept the petitioners possession and transfer the land to the petitioners, by charging market rate. Counsel for the Gram Panchayat and counsel for respondents CWP No.8231 of 2008 3 no.4 to 6 submit that the petitioners are unauthorised occupants of panchayat property and, therefore, cannot urge that as other residents of the village are in unauthorised occupation, they should be allowed to perpetuate their illegal possession. It is submitted that as findings recorded by the Collector and the Commissioner are consistent as to unauthorised occupation of the gair mumkin pond, the petitioners deserve no concession, whether in law or in equity. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the impugned orders and find no reason to hold that the Commissioner committed any error in directing the petitioners ejectment. Khasra no.369 is admittedly a gair mumkin pond. The petitioners have no right to occupy the pond, much less to raise any construction. The fact that a large number of persons have occupied the pond and raised construction does not confer any right upon the petitioners to perpetuate their unauthorised occupation. The mere fact that houses may have been in existence for a period of time, would not enable the petitioners to violate the provisions of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). Unauthorised occupants of panchayat properties deserve no sympathy whether in law or in equity. Before parting with the judgement, it would be appropriate to make a reference to Annexure P-8, a list of persons alleged to be in unauthorised occupation of the gair mumkin pond. If true, the Gram Panchayat is duty bound to proceed against these persons by initiating proceedings under Section 7 of the Act. In view of what has been stated herein above, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the Block Development and Panchayat Officer and CWP No.8231 of 2008 4 the Gram Panchayat are directed to examine the list Annexure P-8 and in case they are satisfied that the gair mumkin pond is in unauthorised occupation of any other person, forthwith proceed in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The exercise of identifying unauthorised occupants shall be concluded within a month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10.2.2010 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE