C.R. No. 5011 of 2008 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5011 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: January 14, 2009 Harvail Kaur and others .. Petitioners v. Punjab Wakf Board and others .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Onkar Rai, Advocate for the petitioners. .. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order passed by the learned Tribunal constituted under the Wakf Act, 1995, whereby the suit for possession filed by the petitioners was dismissed by it. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioners filed a suit for possession of the land in question and also challenging the cancellation order dated 21.3.1998, vide which the lease of land in their favour was cancelled and further granting lease in favour of respondent No. 4. It was stated in the petition that the petitioners and their predecessors-in-interest were in possession of the property in dispute since 1972-73 as lessees. In fact, they had improved the land and made it cultivable by installing tubewell etc. and nearly after 25-26 years, they have been removed therefrom unceremoniously. However, the learned Tribunal did not find any merit in the submissions made and dismissed the suit filed by the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the submissions made before the Tribunal regarding their being in possession of the property since 1972- 73 till the time they were dispossessed. Before this court also, they have placed on record the lease deed in favour of the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners for the year 1972-73, where the land in question was leased out for one year for Rs. 305/-. In addition to this, certain receipts have been placed on record for different years showing payment of Chakota for the land and final receipt produced on record is Annexure -P23, whereby a sum of Rs. 3,200/- was paid as lease money for the year 1997-98. The submission is that keeping in view the fact that the petitioners were in possession of the land for so long and they had made consistent efforts to develop the same, they should not have been dispossessed, as certain C.R. No. 5011 of 2008 [2] rights in the property had been vested them. However, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. The undisputed fact on record is that initially, it was only for the year 1972-73 that lease was granted to the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners which continued on year to year basis till 1997-98. The same was cancelled vide order dated 21.3.1998 while allotting the same to respondent No.4 in an open auction, being the highest bidder. If the lease of the land was given to the petitioners on year to year basis, in my opinion, no right as such was vested in them. The Wakf Board was well within its competence to lease out the land after holding open auction to fetch the maximum lease money. Once it is established on record that land was leased out after holding open auction to respondent No.4, I do not find any illegality in dispossession of the petitioners therefrom as they had the right to remain in possession only upto 31.3.1998. Accordingly, while concurring with the finding recorded by the learned court below, I do not find any merit in the revision petition, the same is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 14.1.2009 mk