LPA No.1460 of 2011 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No.1460 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 18.08.2011 Mukhtiar Singh ....Petitioner Versus Joint Development Commissioner and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih. ... Present: Mr. M.L. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. ... Jasbir Singh, J.(Oral) This appeal has been filed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 4.5.2011, dismissing CWP No.3270 of 2008 filed by the appellant. In the above writ petition, the appellant had laid challenge to an order dated 21.11.2007 passed by the Joint Development Commissioner vide which, order dated 27.6.2005 passed in favour of the appellant, was reversed. As per record, the Gram Panchayat, claiming ownership of the land measuring 3 Kanals and 3 Marlas in Khasra No.39//1, filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for ejectment of the petitioner on a ground that he had unauthorisedly encroached upon the said land, which was being used as a ‘Sath’ (common sitting place for the LPA No.1460 of 2011 2 villagers). That application was dismissed by the competent authority vide an order dated 27.6.2005. The Gram Panchayat went in appeal, which was allowed by the appellate authority on 21.11.2007. When setting aside an order dated 27.6.2005, the Appellate Authority observed as under: -- “After hearing the arguments from both the side and the record which has been placed on file, it is clear that the land belongs to Jumla Mushtarka Malkan we Degar Haqdra Hasab Rasad Raqba Khewat. It is also clear that a Gair Mumkin 'Sath' used to exist at the site before the respondent tried to encroach upon the said land by giving a religious colour. It has also come on record that the respondents have allegedly put a Nishan Sahib on the land which does not belong to them. The claim that Bhachat land should be redistributed to the proprietary body is not tenable as they themselves are not part of the proprietary body as per the record. There is a proper demarcation report which shows that an illegal encroachment has been made by Mukhtiar Singh and others. The complete village and the Gram Panchayat do not want this illegal encroachment to come up on the land in the form of religious Dera. The various statements which have come on record clearly show a very recent attempt to encroach the land which was used as a 'Sath' (common sitting place of village elders and common people). Even if it is presumed that the land belongs to the proprietary body of village, the respondents have failed to show that they are the members of village proprietary body and it cannot claim to be a part of it. The land has been managed by the LPA No.1460 of 2011 3 Gram Panchayat. Hence, I find that lower Court has passed a patently wrong order which deserves to be set aside. The appeal is accepted and the lower Court order is set aside.” The appellant came in the writ petition, which was dismissed by the impugned order, hence this appeal. The learned Single Judge has noted, as a matter of fact, that after demarcation at the spot it was found that the appellant was in unauthorized occupation of the Jumla Mushtarka Malkan land, which was being used as common sitting place by the residents of the village. Appellant’s reliance upon a Civil Court decree dated 28.4.2006 was negatived by stating that it was an ex parte decree. Further the Civil Court jurisdiction was barred. We feel that the order passed is perfectly justified. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant is a co- sharer in the Jumla Mushtarka Malkan land and further that he has any authority to occupy the land in dispute. It is only stated that on the land in dispute a religious place is in existence. Be that as it may, once there is no authority with the appellant to possess the land, he cannot be allowed to retain the same. Dismissed. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge (Augustine George Masih) Judge 18.08.2011 sk.