CR NO.4867 of 2005 - 1 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR NO.4867 of 2005 DATE OF DECISION: 26.08.2009 **** Lt. Col. N.K. Ghai . . . . Petitioner VS. Punjab Agricultural University & others . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** Present: None ***** SURYA KANT J.(ORAL) This Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution, has been preferred by Lt.Col.N.K. Ghai - petitioner (in person) against the order dated 13.08.2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana in an appeal filed by the respondent-Agricultural University, whereby the order dated 15th December, 2004 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana in a matter under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC has been modified and besides directing the parties to maintain status quo, liberty has been granted to the petitioner-plaintiff to get the Collector’s order dated 25.5.2004 implemented in accordance with law. Vide order dated 22nd April, 2009 and 27th May, 2009, the Registry was directed to issue notice to the petitioner. As per the office report, the petitioner has been served through his wife Smt. Poonam Ghai. The petitioner, however, is neither present in person nor represented by any counsel. Similarly, no one appears on behalf of respondent-defendants also. CR NO.4867 of 2005 - 2 - It appears from the record, that the petitioner has filed a civil suit for declaration to the effect that khasra No.82 to 107 measuring 175 kanal 14 marla situated within the revenue estate of Village Kharak and contiguous khasra No.35 measuring 2 kanal 5 marla of village Chahar-117, Tehsil Ludhiana are public passages and the petitioner-plaintiff has a right of way as that is the only passage to approach his agricultural land in village Kharak. He has also sought a declaration regarding illegal cultivation of the Gram Panchayat land by the Punjab Agricultural University without paying any compensation. Certain mutations reflecting change of the title of the land owned by the proprietors, have also been assailed besides claiming mesne profit/damages etc. The petitioner-plaintiff also moved an application under Order 39 Rule 1&2 CPC which was allowed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana vide order dated 15th December, 2004 thereby restraining the defendants from interfering in any manner with the property under the ownership of the petitioner. The respondent-defendants were further restrained from interfering with the use of passage(s) by the petitioner which is in existence in the revenue record. The above-stated order was impugned by the respondent-University in an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana who vide his impugned order dated 13th August, 2005 has directed the parties to maintain status quo till the final disposal of the suit, though liberty has been granted to the petitioner-plaintiff to execute the decision dated 28th May, 2004 of the Collector, Ludhaina. CR NO.4867 of 2005 - 3 - In order to appreciate the controversy for the limited purposes of ad interim injunction, it would be appropriate to refer to the order dated 28th May, 2004 passed by the Collector, Ludhiana, the operative part whereof reads as follows:- “After giving due consideration to the evidences on record, arguments of the learned counsel of the respondent and petitioner himself and looking into all the facts. In my considered opinion, there is a considerable force in the contention of the petitioner. As such all the issues are decided in favour of the petitioner. The link passage and 360 karam, although existing on the ground in village Alowal 117 connecting on western side to passage No.100 of its adjoining village Kharak and on eastern side to the metalled road in village Shole 114 (as mentioned in the field Kanungo’s report dated 16.6.2003 (Ex.P13) and map Ex.P16) is missing only in revenue record. Again missing link about 150 karam of passage in village Chahar-121 for linking its southern side to the passage of adjoining village Bagga Kalan 122 for reaching Mand (Satluj) as shown “To Mand” in northern margin of musavi of village Bagga Kalan is also missing in the revenue record. It is therefore, declared that the ownership of all the gair mumkin rastas sar-e-am, khasra No.81 to 107 (175K – 14M) )Ex.P-19) of village Kharak-120 and similar khasra No.35 (2K-15M) (Ex.P17) of village Chahar 121 vest as Shamlat deh in respective Panchayats, including that of abadi deh land of village Kharak (Ex.P22) Khasra No.80 (88K) (except the part CR NO.4867 of 2005 - 4 - which may be used for dwelling/out houses by the petitioner and other land owners as per the number of holdings of their predecessors-in-interest) and the petitioner is entitled to cultivate his land through the rastas sar-e-am and the respective Panchayats are entitled to recover the income accrued from the above said public premises from the PAU or any other person who is or had been in illegal occupation of such a public premises. Order announced in open Court. File be consigned to record room. Dt: 28.05.2004 Sd/- Addl.Deputy Commissioner (Dev)- cum- Collector, Ludhiana” The above quoted order has been passed by the Collector, Ludhiana in a petition under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961. If the said order has attained finality, it appears, prima facie, that the petitioner- plaintiff has already got a declaration in respect of his ownership as well as right to passage i.e. Rasta Sar-e-Aam. The defendants or anyone else would have no authority whatsoever in law to deprive the petitioner from cultivation of his land through the rasta sar-e-aam in derogation to the order dated 28th May, 2004 passed by the Collector, Ludhiana. Since, the learned Additional District Judge vide his impugned order dated 13th August, 2005 has also permitted the petitioner-plaintiff to get the order of Collector, Ludhiana executed in accordance with law, the direction to maintain status quo shall be construed to mean that the petitioner-plaintiff shall have a right CR NO.4867 of 2005 - 5 - to access to his land through the public passage till the order dated 28th May, 2008 holds the field. With these observations and clarification, this revision petition stands disposed of. (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 26.08.2009 shonkar