Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) THIS order shall dispose of two writ petitions namely CWP No. 14964 of 2009 titled as Durga Dass alias Dawarka Dass Chela v. Commissioner, Hissar Division, Hissar and others for short '1st petition) and CWP No. 9332 of 2010 titled as Mehar Singh v. State of Haryana and others (for short 'IInd petition') as similar question is involved in both the writ petitions for adjudication. In the 1st petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing orders dated 28.11.2000 (Annexure P -14) passed by respondent No. 3 (Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Jind), 25.5.2004 (Annexure P -16) passed by respondent No. 2 (Collector, Jind) and 26.6.2009 (Annexure P -18) passed by respondent No. 1 (Commissioner, Hissar Division, Hissar) whereby an, application filed by Jaina Ram, who is now represented by respondents No. 4 and 5, under Section 7(2) of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulations) Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') has been allowed. In this petition, the petitioner has alleged that land comprising in Khewat No. 482, Khata No. 575, Rect. No. 32, Killa No. 15 (8 -6), 16 (6 -2), 25/2 (3 -18), Rect, No. 47, Killa No. 15(8 -6), 16(6 -2), 25/2(3 -18), Killa No. 5/1/1 (5 -2), 5/1/2(1 -0), total measuring 24 kanals 8 marlas situated in Village Bibipur, Tehsil and District Jind, was owned by Grain Panchayat but was in possession of Suraj Dass Chela Chet Ram Beragi as 'Dholidar' and has been mutated in favour of Chalti widow and the petitioner Durga Dass s/o Suraj Dass by way of mutation No. 976 dated 26.9.1974.
(2.) IT is alleged that Dholidari rights are heritable and there cannot be any revocation of such rights unless conditions of Dholidari are reproduced in writing and proved. The petitioner has thus, claimed protection under Section 4(3)(i) of the Act. In the IInd petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing orders dated 9.5.2007 (Annexure P -4) passed by respondent No. 3 (Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Sonepat), 29.11.2007 (Annexure P -6) by respondent No. 2 (Collector, Sonepat) and 19.3.2009 (Annexure P -8) by respondent No. 1 (Commissioner, Rohtak). In this case, respondent No. 5/Daya Singh filed a petition under Section 7 of the Act in respect of land comprising Khewat No. 157, Khata No. 281, Khasra No. 12/20, 21, 22, total measuring 21 Kanals 9 Marias, situated in village Tewari, Tehsil Ganaur, District Sonepat, which is admittedly owned by Gram Panchayat. It is alleged that the land in question was in possession of Chandan Singh as a 'Dholidar', who has established it in his CWP No. 5101 of 1976, decided on 21.9.1976, and was the predecessor -in -interest of the petitioner. It is further alleged that Gram Panchayat had earlier filed petition under Section 7 of the Act against the petitioner, which was dismissed on 29.10.1996 and the appeal filed against it was also dismissed on 5.2.1997 but thereafter one of the respondents, namely, Daya Singh/respondent No. 5 filed application under Section 7, which has been allowed by all the authorities under the Act. The petitioner has submitted that the Dholidari rights are heritable and being 'Dholidar', the petitioner is protected under Section 4(3)(i) of the Act.
(3.) IN both the aforesaid writ petitions, written statements have been filed by the respondents.;