High CourtsDivision Bench(1997) 04 P&H CK 0149

Gram Panchayat of Village Chandu Khurd vs Director, Consolidation of Holdings

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 17 April 1997 · Citation: (1997) 117 PLR 623 : (1997) 3 RCR(Civil) 520

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.S. Mongia, J · M.L. Koul, J
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 15277 of 1996

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 543 words

M.L. Koul, J.—The respondents herein had moved an application dated 22.2.1996 before the Director, Consolidation of proceedings, that the land in question purported to be vesting in the petitioner-Gram Panchayat as ''shamlat deh'' during the consolidation, was wrongly entered as such and in fact it was not shamlat deh. It is not disputed before us that in the revenue record the entries are to the effect that the land in question is ''shamlat deh.''

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that it is not for the authorities under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1948 to determine whether the land in question is shamlat deh land or not and it is only for the authorities under the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, who can determine the aforesaid question. In the present case the Director Consolidation vide impugned order dated 25.7.1996 held that in fact it is the present respondents who are the proprietors in the village, are the owners of the land in question and is not the ''shamlat deh''. In support of his contention the learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to our notice judgment of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 2000 of 1996 decided on November 07, 1996. In which it was observed as under:-

"We are of the view that the Additional Director, Consolidation, had no authority to go into the question whether the land in dispute was Shamlat Deh or not. This is a question which could only be decided by the Authorities under the Regulation Act. We, therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the Additional Director, Consolidation and also the order of the High Court and send the matter before the Collector, Kapurthala, for decision in accordance with law under the Regulation Act. We make it clear that the Collector shall decide the matter afresh in accordance with law irrespective of the orders passed by the Consolidation Authorities in this respect. We direct the Collector to decide the matter within two months of the receipt of this order."

In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court, whereby the order of the Additional Director of Consolidation, going into the question of land being Shamlat Deh or not was set aside, we allow this writ petition and quash the order of the Director, Consolidation dated 25.7.1996.

3.

We direct the private respondents herein to approach before the Collector, Patiala, under the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, if so advised, within one month from today with an application for the relief which they claimed before the Director of Consolidation and if any such application is filed within the aforesaid period, it will be deemed to have been filed on 20.2.1996 i.e when the application by the respondents was filed before the Director of Consolidation. The Collector shall dispose of the said application in accordance with law after hearing all the concerned.

4.

We have no doubt that the Collector shall dispose of the application expeditiously but not exceeding the period of One year from the date of filing of the application.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Copy of this order be given dasti to the counsel for the parties on payment.