- (1.) The petitioners have questioned the validity of order dated 02.06.2010 (Annexure P-21) passed by respondent No. 2 while allowing the appeal filed by respondent No. 3 by which order dated 08.01.2008 (Annexure P- 20) passed by the Collector-cum-Deputy Divisional Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, Patiala, has been set aside.
(2.) In brief, the case set up by the petitioners is that they are owners in possession of the land in dispute about which respondent No. 3 had once filed a suit for possession, which was dismissed on 03.12.1979, and in the absence of any appeal, the said order had become final. Thereafter, the petitioners filed a suit for declaration on the basis of decree dated 03.12.1973 which was obtained by them on the plea of adverse possession and the said suit for declaration was decreed on 01.12.1980. It is alleged that respondent No. 3 had filed an application under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 [for short "the Act"], which was dismissed on 27.06.1997 and its appeal was dismissed on 14.09.2001, against which respondent No. 3 had filed CWP No. 3512 of 2005 in this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 03.03.2005 in order to file an application under Section 11 of the Act. It is further alleged that the application filed by the Gram Panchayat under Section 11 of the Act was dismissed by the Collector vide his order dated 08.01.2008 but the appeal has been allowed by respondent No. 2 by the impugned order dated 02.06.2010.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that since the petitioners have already been declared owners of the land in dispute by way of a Civil Court decree, therefore, the application filed by respondent No. 3 could not have been allowed by respondent No. 2 declaring title of the Gram Panchayat over the land in dispute.;