IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.8499 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 13.5.2011 Karnail Singh ......Petitioner(s) Versus Director, Rural Dev. & Panchayat Punjab and others ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Vikas Mehsempuri, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Rakesh Kumar, J.(Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders dated 11.6.2010 and 10.12.2010 whereby eviction application filed under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') by respondent No.3 has been allowed and subsequently appeal filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order has been dismissed by the competent Authority. As per the averments made in this writ petition, the petitioner alleges himself to be in possession of the land in question prior to 26.1.1950 and on the basis of aforesaid fact, claims that he was entitled to be declared as owner of the suit property whereas respondent No.3 has filed an eviction application for evicting the petitioner from the land in dispute, thereby claiming the said land of the ownership of the Gram Panchayat and further the Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal without taking into consideration the factum of pendency of the title suit filed under Section 11 of the Act. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court is that before passing the eviction order against the petitioner, it was incumbent upon the competent Authority first to decide the question of title which the petitioner has raised and since the separate litigation filed by the petitioner was still pending, he could not have been evicted from the land in dispute. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have also perused the impugned orders. Admittedly, the title suit filed by the petitioner under Section 11 of the Act has already been dismissed by the competent Authority on 3.5.2010 and appeal against the same also stands dismissed on 10.12.2010. Till date those proceedings have not been challenged by the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid orders passed by the competent Authority, it cannot be argued that the question of title between the parties is still pending. Once a finding has been recorded in the title suit rejecting the claim of the petitioner, the impugned orders cannot be found faulted with. No merit. Dismissed. May 13, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE