GRAM PANCHAYAT OF VILLAGE DIWANGARH Vs. DIRECTOR, CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS PUNJAB
LAWS(P&H)-2001-2-66
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 14,2001

Gram Panchayat Of Village Diwangarh Appellant
VERSUS
Director, Consolidation Of Holdings Punjab Respondents

JUDGEMENT

V.K.JHANJI, J. - (1.) AT the request of counsel, Civil Writ Petitions No. 19656 and 1996 and 6034 of 1997 are taken on board for final disposal.
(2.) IN CWP No. 19656 of 1996 filed by Gram Panchayat of Village Diwangarh, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, challenge is to order dated 6.8.1996 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab (for short the Director) whereby the Director, has allowed petition under Section 43 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) filed by some of the right-holders. Vide impugned order, the Director has remanded the case to the Consolidation Officer for mentioning the shares of the land-owners in Khewat owned by Jumla Mushtarqa Malkan and for distribution of land left after using the same for common purpose. In CWP No. 6034 of 1997 filed by some of the right-holders of Village Diwangarh, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala, prayer made is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents not to auction the land measuring 19 Acres 3 Marlas because as per order dated 3.9.1996 passed by the Director, the land in question does not vest in Panchayat. In brief, the facts are that respondents No. 3 to 15 in CWP No. 19656 of 1996 and petitioners of CWP No. 6034 of 1997 alleging themselves to be right- holder of village, filed petition under Section 42 of the Act before the Additional Director alleging therein that during the consolidation of holdings, excessive cut was imposed on the holdings of Khewatdars of the village for carving out land for common purpose of the Village. It was further alleged that mutation whereby land which was liable to be distributed among the right-holders, was mutated in the name of the Gram Panchayat, is illegal, void and without jurisdiction. It was their case that the land was not Shamlat Deh but was carved out by imposing excessive cut on the holdings of the right-holders.
(3.) NOTICE of the petition was issued to the Gram Panchayat and some other respondents who were likely to be affected by the order. Gram Panchayat appeared and contested the petition. It was pleaded by the Gram Panchayat that the land was not deducted from the holdings of Khewatdars. In fact, it is being used by the Gram Panchayat for common purpose of the village and Gram Panchayat is the absolute owner of the land as it is Shamlat Deh. Vide order dated 6.8.1996 (Annexure P-3), the Director accepted the petition and ordered distribution of land among its various right-holders. Hence, Civil Writ Petition No. 19656 of 1996 challenging order dated 6.8.1996 (Annexure P-3).;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.