CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.20504 OF 2006 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: APRIL 22, 2009 Gram Panchayat, Bachhohi, District Hoshiarpur .....Petitioner VERSUS Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), Pb., Chandigarh 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. M. S. Kang, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Parveen Chander Goyal, Addl.A.G., Punjab, for the State. Mr. Arun Jain, Sr.Advocate with Mr. R. K. Dadwal & Mr. Sunil Sharma, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 to 125. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Petitioner, Gram Panchayat, filed an application under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Commons Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 before the Collector-cum-Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, seeking declaration that the Panchayat be declared as owner of the land in dispute, which is being used for common purposes of the village. Except for some part of the land, CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.20504 OF 2006 :{ 2 }: which was said to have been reserved for common purposes during consolidation, this application was declined on 29.12.2003. Gram Panchayat filed an appeal against the order and the case was remanded back with directions to keep the observations made in the order in mind and then pass a conclusive and speaking order. The case was, thus, again taken up for hearing by the Collector, who came to conclude that as per the evidence and documents, the land in dispute was never in use for common purpose of the village. Decisions of the Civil Court rendered in the years 1933 and the year 1971 were held applicable to both the parties. It was also observed that the Gram Panchayat was not able to prove if it was ever selling grass/baggar wood from this land. 3242 Kanals and 16 marlas land was found to have been reserved for common purposes. The Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur, had given his decision in this regard on 29.12.2003, which was termed as correct. Accordingly, the Gram Panchayat was held to have no rights in the remaining land, except the land measuring 3242 kanals 16 marlas. Dis-satisfied, Gram Panchayat filed an appeal before the Joint Development Commissioner, who has upheld the order passed by the Collector and accordingly dismissed the appeal. The Appellate Authority also found that the only land measuring 3242 kanals 16 marlas was reserved for common purposes and, thus, would be in the ownership of the Gram Panchayat. The Gram Panchayat accordingly has filed this writ petition to challenge both the orders. Mr.Kang appearing for the petitioner has placed strong reliance on Annexure P-1, which is extracts of Wajab-Ul-Arz, to say that the land was being used for common purposes and as such, CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.20504 OF 2006 :{ 3 }: would be in the ownership of Panchayat. He would refer to the part of Wajab-Ul-Arz, which makes a mention that cattle belonging to proprietors and non-proprietors of the entire village will continue grazing as here-to- before from time immemorial without any discrimination. The land has also been described as Banjar Mumkin etc. and it is also recorded that other Pahar land which is reclaimed can also be got partitioned. From this, the counsel would contend that the land in dispute was used for common purposes for time immemorial and, thus, the impugned orders can not be sustained in view of the documents on record. Mr.Arun Jain, on the other hand, would urge that 3242 kanals of land has been left by the proprietors of the village during consolidation for various common purposes of the village and this land has been mutated in the name of Khewatdars. This is the land, according to the counsel, related to the Wajab-Ul-Arz and, thus, the impugned orders are fully justified in law. Reference is also made to judgment dated 22.5.1971 passed by Sub Judge Ist Class, Hoshiarpur, where a declaration in regard to land measuring 56234 kanals 19 marlas was sought. This suit was filed by the plaintiffs therein for themselves as well as in the representative capacity on behalf of the Gram Sabha, pleading that this land vested in the Panchayat of the three villages and the defendants, who were the proprietors, had no interest in the land. This suit was dismissed, which was subsequently not challenged. In the impugned order, reference is also made to an order passed on 19.1.1934 by Civil Court, which was also decided against the Gram Panchayat and the non-proprietors and it was held that the proprietors were owners of CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.20504 OF 2006 :{ 4 }: the suit land. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Gram Panchayat, could not say much in this regard. It was also pointed out on behalf of the respondents that after preparation of fresh Bandobasat in the year 1970, Wajab-Ul-Arz (Annexure P-1) would have no relevance and would have no conclusive evidentiary value as to the records of right, which has been updated afresh after consolidation. To see the evidentiary value of Wajab-Ul-Arz, reference can be made to Raja Rajinder Chand Vs. Mst.Sukhi and others, AIR 1957 Supreme Court 286 and Union of India Vs. Parmod Gupta (D) by L.Rs & Ors., 2005 (4) RCR 235. I find no reason to interfere in the impugned order and finding no merits in the petition would dismiss the same. April 22,2009 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE