P. Sathasivam, J. - (1.) These appeals are directed against the common final judgment and order dated 24.04.2000 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 10490 and 10738 of 1998 whereby the High Court allowed both the writ petitions filed by the respondents herein.
(2.) Brief facts: (a) The Tehsildar, Phagwara, Appellant No. 3 herein, filed two eviction petitions under Sections 4 and 7 of the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") against Brahm Dutt and Hari Saran, the respondents herein. In the petition filed against Hari Saran, it was stated that the land bearing Khasra No. 45 Min. North 2-5, 46 Min. East 2-4 (KM), 47/8-0, 50/8-0, total measuring 20-K-9M, bearing Khewat No. 24, Khatauni No. 109 situated in village Bishanpur, Tehsil Phagwara, as per Jamabandi for the year 1990-91, was owned by the Punjab Government and the respondent had unauthorized taken possession of the same. In the petition filed against Brahm Dutt, it was stated that as per Jamabandi for the year 1975-76 land measuring Khewat No. 240 Khatauni No. 240, Khatauni No. 112, Khasra No. 37/K7 M4 38/8K-0M, 39 Min. North 2K-4M, 40 Min. North 2K-6M total measuring 19K-14M KM belongs to the Punjab Government and has been unauthorized occupied by the respondents. (b) By orders dated 23.10.1996 and 24.10.1996, the Collector, Phagwara, Dist. Kapurthala, ordered the eviction of both the respondents herein. (c) Aggrieved by the said orders, the respondents preferred appeals before the Commissioner, Jalandhar under Section 9 of the Act. By order dated 27.01.1998, the appellate Authority - the Commissioner, dismissed both the appeals and confirmed the orders passed by the Collector. (d) Questioning the said order, Brahm Dutt filed C.W.P. No. 10490 of 1998 and Hari Saran filed C.W.P. No. 10738 of 1998 before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana for quashing the orders of the Collector dated 23 & 24.10.1996 as well as the order of the Commissioner dated 27.01.1998. In the writ petitions, it was stated by the respondents herein that the land in dispute were earlier owned by the Maharaja of Kapurthala, who had allowed their fore-fathers to cultivate the land. It was also stated that they had been in possession of the land for more than 30 years and, therefore, had become the owners of the land by adverse possession. (e) The appellants herein - official respondents, filed written statement before the High Court denying their claim as to possession and asserted that the Government is the real owner of the land in dispute. (f) By a common order dated 24.04.2000, the High Court allowed both the writ petitions and quashed the orders passed by the Collector and the Commissioner. The High Court held that the respondents had been in possession of the land by way of grant/gift from the Maharaja of Kapurthala. It was also held by the High Court that the respondents had entered into the possession of land in an authorized manner and had become owners since they had been in possession for more than 30 years. (g) Aggrieved by the aforesaid common order passed by the High Court, the officials of the Government of Punjab preferred the above appeals by way of special leave petitions before this Court.
(3.) Heard Mr. Prashant Shukla, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mr. S. Balakrishnan, learned senior counsel for the respondents in both the appeals.;