In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 ..... Date of decision:11.11.2009 Baldev Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and others .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. P.N. Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Gill, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 5. Mr. G.S. Punia, Advocate for respondent No.4. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for restraining the respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner in plot No.32, Khasra No.320 situated in the revenue estate of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. It is alleged that the petitioner is owner in possession of plot No.32 comprised in Khasra No.320 in the `Abadi Deh'. The same has been given Khasra No.25. The site plan (Annexure-P.1) of abadi of the village depicting the plot in question has been placed on record. It is submitted that since Samvat 1985 Sohan Singh, the grand-father of the petitioner along with other right holders are in possession of the plots to the extent of their share in the land and they have also carved out streets for their use. C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 [2] Mutation No.258, it is stated, was sanctioned by the Tehsildar on 27.5.1986 (Annexure-P.2) regarding `Shamilat Deh' land measuring 76 Kanals 19 Marlas. The primary relief claimed by the petitioner is for protection of possession of his plot from interference by the Gram Panchayat of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala (respondent No.4). Written statement has been filed by the Gram Panchayat Village Majra Manna Singh Wala, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib (respondent No.4). It is stated that the petitioner has filed three civil suits one after the other claiming similar relief. The present petition has been filed when the petitioner failed to get relief in the civil suits. Copies of the suits have been attached as Annexures R.4/1 to R.4/3. The actual facts, it is submitted by respondent No.4 are that the petitioner and others had illegally encroached the street. They were asked to remove the encroachment. However, they being headstrong persons raised a wall in the street and caused obstruction in the use of the street. The wall which was illegally constructed by the petitioner and others has been demolished on 5.12.2007. Thereafter, possession was taken by the Gram Panchayat, Majra Manna Singh Wala (respondent No.4) and resolution to this effect was passed by the Gram Panchayat on the same day. The Gram Panchayat (respondent No.4) passed a further resolution dated 9.12.2007 to make the street pucca. A copy of the resolution was sent to the Police Station and to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Amloh to provide Police help to the Gram Panchayat as the petitioner and others were causing obstruction in the street. It is submitted that the petitioners and others have been making efforts to encroach upon the street which is the property of the Gram C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 [3] Panchayat (respondent No.4). It is denied that the petitioner is owner of plot No.32 comprised in Khasra No.320 in the `Abadi Deh’ which has been given Khasra No.25. The petitioner is neither owner nor in possession of Khasra No.25, besides, there is no plot No.32 as alleged. The site plan (Annexure-P.1) is wrong. There is no such site plan nor have any plots been carved out. According to the revenue record, Khasra No.25 is `Abadi Deh’ measuring 43 Kanals 18 Marlas. During consolidation this land was left reserved for `Abadi’ and the residents of the village themselves left the paths. There is a street which leads to the cremation ground and it was encroached upon by the petitioner and others which encroachment has been removed by the Gram Panchayat (respondent no.4) and possession of the same has been taken. The mutation referred to by the petitioner, it is submitted, does not relate to the property in dispute. In this regard the Gram Panchayat (respondent No.4) obtained a report (Annexure-R.4/4) of the revenue authorities and there is no such mutation report on the record. The primary stand that has been taken is that the petitioner and others had made encroachments on the Gram Panchayat land which has since been removed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not liable to be disturbed from his possession in the land which is evident from the site plan (Annexure-P.1). Besides, mutation No.258 (Annexure-P.2) has been sanctioned on 27.5.1986 in respect of land measuring 76 Kanals 19 Marlas in favour of Shamlat Deh. It is also submitted that the Gram Panchayat of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala (respondent No.4) filed a petition under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (`Act' – for short) for ejectment of C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 [4] one Manjit Kaur from the plot No.30 and passage No.31 of Khasra No.320 and also for ejectment of Amar Singh from plot No.30 of Khasra No.320. It is submitted that in the said suit the boundaries have been mentioned, which show that on the east is plot of Sohan Singh-the grand-father of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the reports of the revenue authorities on the application dated 4.11.2005 (Annexure-R.4/4) submitted by the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala (respondent No.4) are to the effect that there is no mutation No.258 dated 27.5.1986 nor Khasra No.320 is there on record are incorrect in view of the report dated 19.6.2009 (Annexure-P.7) submitted by the Assistant Office Quanango, Tehsil Amloh which is endorsed by the Tehsildar, Amloh. In the said report it is mentioned that mutation No.258 of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala is in Urdu and after consolidation new Khatauni of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala and Jamabandi for the year 1953-54 are in Punjabi. The Khewat/Khata 66/128, Khasra No.481/1(9-11) Gair Mumkin Abadi, Khasra no.482 (16-16), total area 26 Bighas, 7 Biswas and Khasra mutation vide book No.42 is in Punjabi writing, the copies of which were issued by the Office Kanungo, Amloh. Therefore, the respondents are liable to be restrained from forcibly dispossessing the petitioner from the plot No.32 comprised in Khasra No.320 in the `Abadi'. In response, learned counsel appearing for the Gram Panchayat of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala (respondent No.4) has submitted that the petitioner by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court cannot seek an injunction. Besides, it is submitted that the petitioner has filed three suits dated 28.3.2007 (Annexure-R.4/1), dated 10.12.2007 (Annexure-R.4/2) and C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 [5] dated 27.12.2007 (Annexure-R.4/3) seeking permanent injunction in respect of plot No.32, Khasra No.320. It is submitted that the petitioner having failed to get an order of injunction in his favour, he cannot seek same relief by filing the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the suit (Annexure-R.4/1) does not specifically relate to plot No.32. Besides, the suit (Annexure-R.4/2) is only with regard to wall constructed in plot No.32 of Khasra No.320 and the suit (Annexure-R.4/3) does not mention any Khasra number. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance perused the record. As has already been noticed the primary relief claimed by the petitioner is for restraining the respondents from interfering in his possession of plot No.32 comprised in Khasra No.320 in the `Abadi Deh' of the revenue estate of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala, Tehsil Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. This Court in exercise of its supervisory writ jurisdiction is not to embark upon an inquiry to determine disputed questions of facts as regards the nature of possession of land between two contesting parties. The scope of writ jurisdiction is limited and the questions involved are normally to be determined on the basis of admitted and undisputed facts. In respect of the dispute as to possession of property the civil Court is the proper and efficacious remedy. The present case relates to dispute of Shamlat Deh land of the Gram Panchayat. The petitioner has placed reliance on mutation No.258 sanctioned on 25.7.1986 (Annexure-P.2). In terms of which mutation of 76 C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 [6] Kanals 19 Marlas of land has been sanctioned in favour of Shamlat Deh. Shamlat Deh land vests in the Gram Panchayat in view of Section 4 of the Act. The questions regarding ownership of Shamlat Deh land are to be decided by the Collector under the Act as held by the Supreme Court in Gram Panchayat Kot Manna v. Additional Director, Consolidation, (1998) 9 SCC 269. Even otherwise, the petitioner has not placed any material on record to show as to how plot No.32 comprised in Khasra No.320 in the `Abadi Deh’ came in his possession and what is the foundation of his title or possession to the same. Mutation No.258 dated 27.5.1986 (Annexure-P.2) referred to by the petitioner does not specifically mention plot No.32 of Khasra No.320. The said mutation in fact has been sanctioned in favour of `Shamilat Deh'. The said mutation does not, in any manner, indicate that the land was transferred in favour of the petitioner or his predecessors-in interest. The filing of the petition dated 15.3.2006 (Annexure-P.3) by the Gram Panchayat seeking ejectment of Manjit Kaur and Amar Singh from plot No.30 and passage No.31 of Khasra No.320 and plot No.30 of Khasra No.320 respectively only mentions that the plot Sohan Singh son of Bishan Singh is on the east of the plot from which eviction is sought. The mere fact while describing the boundaries in the said case, the plot of Sohan Singh (the grand-father of the petitioner) has been mentioned on the East would not mean that the petitioner has been able to establish his foundation of any claim to plot No.32 of Khasra No.320 in the `abadi deh’. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed three suits seeking permanent injunction. In the suit (Annexure-R.4/1) a prayer has been made for permanent injunction restraining the defendants in the said suit including the Gram Panchayat of C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 [7] Village Majra Manna Singh Wala (respondent No.4) from interfering, in any manner, over plots No.320, 320/1, 320/20 and 320/147 Min. shown in mutation No.147 of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala. The said suit though relates to plot No.320, however, it is in the context of mutation No.147. It may be noticed that in fact the petitioner has been taking inconsistent stands, inasmuch as, it is stated in the petition that the plot was transferred in his favour vide mutation No.258 (Annexure-P.2). The said mutation as already noticed, has been sanctioned in favour of the `Shamilat Deh'. Mutation No.147 which is mentioned in the plaint of the suit (Annexure- R.4/1) is not on record and it is not clear as to which land the said mutation relates to. The suit (Annexure-R.4/2) is a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendants therein including the Gram Panchayat of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala (respondent No.4) from interfering in certain land out of Khasra No.320 shown in mutation No.147. The said suit specifically mentions plot No.32 of Khasra No.320. Therefore, in the suit (Annexure- R.4/2) plot No.32 of Khasra No.320 is in the context of mutation No.147. The petitioner has not placed on record mutation No.147 and rather his case in the petition is that plot No.32 of Khasra No.320 was transferred on the basis of mutation No.258 (Annexure-P.2). The suit (Annexure-R.4/3) mentions the boundaries of certain land in Village Majra Manna Singh Wala. The khasra numbers are not mentioned. It may, in any case, be noticed that the petitioner is liable to claim his relief in one and the same proceedings and he cannot institute one suit after the other. The writ petition as filed is wholly misconceived and is bereft of any material particulars. There is no basis for holding that the petitioner, in any manner, C.W.P. No.7561 of 2008 [8] is in occupation of land in plot No.32 of Khasra No.320. The reference to the report dated 19.6.2009 (Annexure-P.7) shows that mutation No.147 of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala is in Urdu writing. Besides, mutation No.258 of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala is also in Urdu writing. In any case, it is not shown by the petitioner as to by which of the mutations whether mutation No.147 or 258 has the land has been transferred in his favour. It is admittedly not transferred in pursuance of mutation No.258 (Annexure-P.2) as the same has been sanctioned in favour of `Shamilat Deh'. Mutation No.147, in any case, has not been placed on record. Therefore, not much significance can be attached to the report dated 19.6.2009 (Annexure-P.7) insofar as the claim to ownership or possession of the land of the petitioner in respect of plot No.32, Khasra No.320 in `Abadi Deh' of Village Majra Manna Singh Wala is concerned. In the circumstances, the writ petition is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed. This order shall, however, not be construed as an expression of opinion with respect to the claim of the petitioner in the pending civil suits and if on the basis of material and evidence produced on record he can claim any right to plot No.32 comprised in Khasra No.320 in `Abadi Deh’ of the village, the learned civil Court shall consider the same in accordance with law. November 11, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp* NOTE: Whether to be referred to the Reporter or not:Yes