Civil Writ Petition No.15963 of 2007 : 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: APRIL 16, 2009 Kartar Singh and others .....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana 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.N.D.Achint, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Yashwinder Singh, AAG, Haryana, for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Mr.Vijay S.Kajla, Advocate, for respondent No.5. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners claiming themselves to be in possession of this land from the time of their ancestors have impugned the order passed by the authorities holding the Gram Panchayat to be owner of the said land. Reference is made to entries for the year 1938-39 showing the land measuring 159 Bighas 12 Biswas as owned and possessed by the proprietors of the village, including the petitioners. The land comprising in Khasra Nos.1849, 1859/1, 139 and 1860 is claimed to be in cultivating possession of the predecessor-in-interest Civil Writ Petition No.15963 of 2007 : 2 : of the petitioners as per jamabandi for the year 1941-42. Even after consolidation, the land continued to be shown in possession of predecessors of the petitioners. The petitioners have themselves averred that for the first time in the revenue entries for the years 1945-46 and 1955-56, the possession of the Forest Department and the petitioners is indicated. This is stated to be incorrectly recorded in the revenue record and reference is made to an order passed by Addl.District Judge, Gurgaon in favour of the petitioners where they have been awarded compensation for the land acquired. On 27.7.2000, petitioners instituted a suit under Section 13-A of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act (for short “the Act”) for seeking declaration that they are owners of the land and that it does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. District Collector dismissed the suit on 6.5.2003 against which an appeal was filed which was also dismissed on 18.3.2004. Revision petition was also dismissed by the Financial Commissioner on 29.5.2007, which are under challenge in the present writ petition. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Collector, Commissioner and Financial Commissioner have failed to appreciate the documents placed on record while holding that Gram Panchayat is the owner of the land in dispute, which is in possession of the petitioners for more than fifty years. The impugned orders are perused with the help of the counsel for the petitioners. The question of title has been decided by the Collector after giving opportunity to the respective parties to lead their evidence. The petitioners examined Halqa Patwari to place on record the jamabandies. According to the jamabandi for the year 1945-46, petitioners were Civil Writ Petition No.15963 of 2007 : 3 : shown in possession as co-sharers in respect of the shamlat land. On the other hand, respondent-Gram Panchayat furnished affidavit of Sarpanch, who deposed that the Gram Panchayat was the owner of the land and it was never cultivated but was used for grazing the cattle. Even in the jamabandi produced by the petitioners for the year 1945-46, Department of Forest was shown to be in the cultivation and nature of the land was shown to be Gair Mumkin Darar. Accordingly, it could not be proved that the land was in possession of the petitioners for 12 years prior to 26.1.1950. The Commissioner had also examined all these entries in the revenue record while considering the appeal filed by the petitioners. Land was shown as shamlat deh since 1938-39 and ownership was changed in the year 1955-56 in the name of Gram Panchayat. The land in the revenue record was shown as Gair Mumkin Pahar and in the possession of the Forest Department. The petitioners, thus, could not show that they were in cultivating possession for 12 years prior to 26.1.1950. The counsel for the petitioners has not been able to make good his submission that the authorities did not take into consideration the material and the revenue record which was available. Concurrent finding by all the authorities is that the land in question is recorded as shamlat deh and, thus, would be in the ownership of the Gram Panchayat. Nothing could be pointed out before me which would call for interference in the impugned orders. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. April 16, 2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE