C.W.P.No.4777 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.4777 of 2008 Date of Decision 2.12.2009 Kanwar Singh ........ Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ........ Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr.P.R.Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Sukant Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.Jai Veer Yadav, Advocate, for respondents No.3 and 4. Mr.Rupam K.Aggarwal, Advocate, for respondent No.5. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has approached this court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing the order dated 6.2.2007 (Annexure P-2), passed by Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Rewari which was affirmed by the Collector District, Rewari, vide order dated 31.10.2007 (Annexure P-4). The petitioner had filed a petition under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands Act, 1961, (for short “the Act”) seeking eviction of the respondents from the land falling in Rasta in Khasra No.49/75 measuring 10 square yards with the averments that respondent Nos.3 and 4 have encroached upon the same. The Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Rewari, vide order dated 6.2.2007, came to the conclusion that C.W.P.No.4777 of 2008 -2- there has been no encroachment on rasta by Kanwar Singh s/o Arjun Singh, respondent No.3 falling in Khasra No.49/75 and accordingly, dismissed the petition. The said finding was affirmed by the Collector, Rewari on appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the record with their assistance. The Assistant Collector Ist Grade, Rewari, while dismissing the application of the petitioner under Section 7 of the Act , recorded as under: “I have heard both the parties have properly perused the file and have also inspected the spot of disputed rasta. Khasra No.49/75 rasta is within the abadi and both the parties admit it as rasta Sare Aam. In south of this rasta plot khasra No.66/11 of respondent no.1 and 2 situated and the same is situated between the road and the rasta is clarified by the Local Commission in his report dated 6.2.2007 that rasta khasra No.49/75 does not lead to the road. There is no encroachment of Kanwar Singh son of Arjun Singh on rasta khasra no.49/75. Therefore, from the report of the Local Commission dated 6.2.2007 spot inspection and from evidence come on the file, I have reached to the conclusion that respondent no.1 and 2 have not encroached upon any part of disputed rasta Khasra No.49/75 and therefore application of the plaintiff under Section 7 VCL is dismissed.” The Collector Rewari, vide order dated 31.10.2007, while upholding the finding of the Assistant Collector Ist Grade, that there is no encroachment by Kanwar Singh-respondent No.3 on rasta bearing khasra C.W.P.No.4777 of 2008 -3- No.49/75, dismissed the appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the authorities have failed to appreciate the oral as well as documentary evidence in right perspective and, therefore, the findings recorded by the authorities are perverse. He, however, has not been able to refer to any misreading or non-consideration of evidence which may warrant interference by this court. In view of the above, I find no merit in the writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed. December 2, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) rishu JUDGE