- (1.) The petitioners pray for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing orders dated 15.04.2009 (Annexure P-3) and 03.11.2010(Annexure P-5), passed by the Collector-cum-Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development & Panchayats, Patiala and Director, Rural Development & Panchayats, Punjab (exercising the powers of Commissioner), respectively.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were in possession of the land in dispute before 1950. The mere fact that the land in dispute was mutated in the name of the Gram Panchayat on 07.12.1956, does not confer title upon the Gram Panchayat. It is further argued that as the land in dispute was "Shamilat Deh Hasab- Rasad Arazi Khewat" in the possession of Makbuja Malkan, it clearly establishes that the Gram Panchayat was not owner or in possession. It is further argued, by reference to the impugned orders, that entries in jamabandies regarding possession of lessees of the Gram Panchayat are factually incorrect as the land is in possession of the petitioners. The impugned orders, rejecting the petition filed under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1961 Act') and the appeal should, therefore, be set aside.
(3.) We have heard counsel for the petitioners The petitioners, claim that the land in dispute, does not vest in the Gram Panchayat, in view of their continuous possession before 1950. Both, the petition filed under Section 11 of the Act and the appeal have been dismissed on the ground that the petitioners have failed to prove their possession before 1950. We have perused the paper book, the impugned orders and find no material on record to hold that the petitioners were in possession before 1950. The jamabandi for the years 1950-51 does not record the petitioners' possession as it records that the land is "Shamilat Deh Hasab Rasad Arazi Khewat" in possession of "Makbuja Malkan". The jamabandi does not record the petitioners in possession of any part of the land As per Section 2(g)(1) of the 1961 Act and the Pepsu Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Pepsu Act'), land described in the revenue record as "Shamilat Deh" vests in a Gram Panchayat. The expression "Hasab Rasad Paimana Malkiat" is superfluous as it merely refers to the share holding of proprietors, prior to the vesting of "Shamilat Deh" in a Gram Panchayat. The argument that as a mutation does not confer title, the Gram Panchayat cannot claim ownership, on the basis of a mutation, is misconceived. A Gram Panchayat draws its title to Shamilat land from the statutory vesting of 'Shamilat Deh" in accordance with the Pepsu Act and the 1961 Act. The mutation merely reflects ownership, as declared by the aforementioned enactments. The impugned orders, dismissing the petition filed under Section 11 of the 1961 Act, for declaration of title and the appeal, therefore, do not call for any interference.;