IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Letters Patent Appeal No.714 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 28.6.2010 Kesar Singh …..Appellant versus The Director, Rural Development and Panchayats Punjab and others ……Respondent CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.T.P.Singh, Advocate for the appellant Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) By filing this appeal, the appellant has laid challenge to the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 4.5.2010, dismissing CWP No.7932 of 2010 filed by the appellant/petitioner. In the above said writ petition, the petitioner has laid challenge to the orders passed by the Collector on 20.8.2007 and the appellate authority on 24.2.2010. It is apparent from the records that the respondent-Gram Panchayat filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (in short the Act) for ejectment of the petitioner from the land in dispute by alleging that he was in unauthorized occupation of the Gram Panchayat’s land. The Collector, on appraisal of documents put on record by the parties, came to a conclusion that the petitioner had come in possession of the land in dispute unauthorisedly about seven to eight years earlier to filing of application against him. Claim of the petitioner that he had been in possession of the Letters Patent Appeal No.714 of 2010(O&M) property in dispute for the last 60 years did not find favour with the Courts below. In appeal also, he failed. The learned Single Judge, by taking note of the averments made in the writ petition has observed as under:- “The Collector and the Commissioner have recorded concurrent findings of fact that the petitioner has no right to construct a flour mill or raise any other construction, as he is an unauthorized occupant. The plea that the petitioner has been in possession for the last sixty years is not supported by any evidence, documentary or otherwise. The petitioner is a rank trespasser, who has appropriated Panchayat property to his benefit.” We feel that the order passed is perfectly justified. It is an admitted fact that the appellant is in unauthorized occupation of the property of the Gram Panchayat. It is contention of counsel for the appellant that in khasra Nos. in dispute, other residents of the village have also raised construction and no action has been taken against them. On this ground no relief can be granted to the appellant. Counsel for the appellant states that let the appellant retain the land in question against payment of its price. We feel that such an order cannot be passed in this appeal because it is for the Gram Panchayat to sell the land in question or not as per rules. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 28.06.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 2