CWP No.6486 of 1988 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6486 of 1988 Date of decision:08.03.2011 Santokh Singh and others ..... Petitioners Versus Gram Panchayat, Badalgarh, Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur through its Sarpanch and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr.J.R.Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Lalit Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. ***** RAJIVE BHALLA, J.(ORAL) The short point that arises for adjudication is whether the Gram Panchayat could file a petition for grant of damages for illegal occupation of its land, after its petition, filed under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was allowed. An application filed under Section 7 of the Act was allowed. The petitioners vacated the land. The Gram Panchayat filed a fresh application for damages for use and occupation of the land. The application was allowed by the District Development and Panchayat Officer, Sangrur, exercising powers of the Collector, by directing the petitioners to pay damages of Rs.16,000/- p.a. The petitioners thereafter filed an appeal which was allowed in part and damages were reduced from Rs.16,000/- p.a. to Rs.1600/- p.a. As is apparent from the impugned orders, the Gram Panchayat CWP No.6486 of 1988 -2- filed a petition for damages on a fresh cause of action as despite ejectment orders, the petitioners did not vacate the land. Rule 20-A of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964, reads as follows: - "20. Putting Panchayat in possession: - xxx (1) xxx (2) xxx (3) xxx (4) xxx 20-A Damages: - 1. If any person who is a lessee of any land vested or deemed to have been vested in a Panchayat does not deliver to the Panchayat vacant possession of the land, immediately after the expiry of the period of lease, he shall for the period he fails to do so, be liable to pay damages to the Panchayat equivalent to twenty times, the amount which would have been payable to the Panchayat had the lease of such land continued during that period. 2. The provisions contained in sub-rule (1) shall be deemed to be one of the terms of each lease of land granted by the Panchayat after the commencement of the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation (3rd Amendment) Rules, 1978." Rule 20-A the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964, clearly provides for payment of damages if a lessee does not vacate the land or does not deliver vacant possession to the Panchayat. The petitioners admittedly did not vacate possession of the land after the order of ejectment. The Gram Panchayat was therefore, entitled to file a fresh petition seeking damages. Presuming for a moment that the Collector-cum-DDPO did not have jurisdiction to award damages, the Gram Panchayat was entitled to file a suit for damages. The paltry amount awarded against CWP No.6486 of 1988 -3- the petitioners, dissuades me from interfering with the impugned orders. Dismissed. 08.03.2011 [ RAJIVE BHALLA ] shamsher JUDGE