- (1.) By way of this order, we shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3193, 3378 and 3379 of 1986 as they involve adjudication of common questions of law and fact and have been filed to challenge the same impugned orders. The Gram Panchayat of Village Bhattian has filed three separate petitions, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing orders dated 16.4.1985 (Annexure P-12) and 29.1.1986 (Annexure P-13) passed by the Collector/DDPO, Patiala and the Joint Director, Panchayat, Punjab, (exercising the powers of 'Commissioner'), respectively.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the land, in dispute, is, admittedly, recorded as "Shamilat Deh". The Collector allowed the petition for eviction against Jamna Dass and Behal Singh, but wrongly dismissed the petition against Dalbir Singh. The Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal filed by the Gram Panchayat and allowed the appeals filed by Dalbir Singh, Jamna Dass and Behal Singh (the respondents in the other writ petitions) on the ground that as the land was "Banjar Qadim" on 9.1.1954, and not used for any common purpose, on the date of the coming into force of the Pepsu Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1954, (hereinafter referred to as the "1954 Act"), it does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. The Appellate Authority has also recorded a finding that the land, in dispute, was in cultivating possession of Nand Singh before 26.1.1950 and, therefore, does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. It is further submitted that the finding that Banjar land was not used for common purposes of the village is contrary to the Wazib-Ul-Arz, which clearly records that banjar land can be used for grazing of cattle (a common purpose). The finding that the land, in dispute, was in cultivating possession of Nand Singh is contrary to the finding that the land is "Banjar Qadim", i.e., land that has remained fallow for eight harvests. It is also argued that Dalbir Singh draws his title from a collusive civil court decree suffered in his favour by his father. The decree is, even otherwise, null and void, as it was passed after Section 13 of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "1961 Act"), was enacted, prohibiting a civil court from entertaining a suit relating to any right, title or interest in "Shamilat Deh". The decree does not bind the Gram Panchayat as the Gram Panchayat was not arrayed as a party. It is further submitted that decree dated 25.5.1982, obtained by Dalbir Singh against the Gram Panchayat, was collusive as the Sarpanch had no authority to admit the rights of Dalbir Singh. The decree has to be ignored in view of Sections 13 and 13-A of the 1961 Act. It is further submitted that order dated 29.1.1986 passed by the Joint Director Panchayats ordering the eviction of Joginder Singh has been ignored.
(3.) Counsel for the private respondents submit that the land, in dispute, does not belong to the Gram Panchayat. The orders passed under Section 7 of the 1961 Act, do not operate as res judicata. The civil suit filed by Dalbir Singh was decreed by holding that the land does not vest in the Gram Panchayat. The decree operates as res judicata. It is also pointed out that the Gram Panchayat has failed to prove that the land, which was, admittedly, "Banjar Qadim" in 1954, was used and reserved for any common purpose as per the revenue record and is, therefore, excluded from "Shamilat Deh", by virtue of Section 2(g)(5) of the 1961 Act. The other findings recorded by the Collector and the Appellate Authority are also legal and valid.;