46 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)8632/2010&CM No.21969/2010(for stay) SH. SANTRAM Petitioner Through; Mr. N.S. Dalai, Adv. Versus GAON SABHABAKHTAWARPUR Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal& Mr. Alok Singh, Advocates with Dr. B.M. Mishra, SDM (Narela). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER % 04.05.2011 1. The file has been received on transfer from the Bench of JusticeHima Kohli,as perthe generaldirectionin force ofHon'blethe ChiefJustice. 2. This order is in continuation of the earlier orders dated 23"^ December,2010 and 14^January,2011. 3. Thoughno reply/counteraffidavithas been filedbutDr. B.M. Mishra, SDM (Narela)appearsinpersonalongwithoriginalrecord. 4. The counsel for the respondent has referred to the recent judgment dated 28^ January,2011 of the Apex Court in Civil AppealNo.1132/2011 titled Jagpal Singh Vs. State of Punjabissuinggeneraldirectionsand W.P.(C) 8632/2010 ' of3 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified 7 making general observationswith respect to trespassers on Gaon Sabha land. 5. However, a person can be called as trespasseronly as a result of a proceedinginteralia under Section86Aofthe DelhiLandReformsAct. In the present case, the order under Section 86A was ex parte and the applicationof the father of the petitionerfor setting aside of the ex parte orderremainedpendingfor nearlyseven years. The Gaon Sabhaand/orthe Revenue Assistant then did not show any haste for executingthe order under Section 86A or for disposingof the application. For this fact and for the reasonsrecordedin the order dated 23^'^ December,2010, it appearsthat an opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to contest Section 86A proceedings;howevermakingthe mattertime bound so that no furthertime is lost. 5. Accordingly,the ex parte order dated 7^ December, 1999 under Section 86A is set aside. The Officer present in Court states that he would be able to conclude the proceedings within one month. 6. In the circumstances, the petitioner is directed to appear before the said Officeron 10^May, 2011 at 1400 hoursalongwith his reply/objection. The proceedings including recording of evidence if necessitated be conducted on a day to day basis. The petitioner on his part undertakes not to delay the proceedings and not to take any adjournments. The Officer would be entitled to close opportunity of the petitioner if found to be delayingthe W.P.(C) 8632/2010 Page 2 of3 matterunnecessarily. The proceedingsbepositivelyconcludedon orbefore 15^ June, 2011. Till then the petitionerbe not dispossessedfrom the land. The counselfor the petitionerconfirmsthatthe petitioneris inpossessionof the land has not inductedany person into possessionthereof and has not encumbered the same in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner is restrainedfrom alienating,transferringorpartingwithpossessionofthe land tillthe disposalof theproceedingsaforesaid. 7. The petitionerthroughcounselfurtherundertakesto this Court to in the eventofthe orderinthe proceedingsunderSection86A ofthe Actbeing againstthe petitioner,within30 days thereofand subjectto furtherordersif any in appeal, to deliver peaceful physicalpossessionof the land to the Gaon Sabha. 8. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of No order as to costs. Copyofthis orderbegivenDastiundersignatureofthe CourtMaster. MAY 04, 2011 Bs IV.P.(C) 8632/2010 RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J Page 3 of3