- (1.) This order will dispose of CWP No. 12553 of 2014 titled 'Hardev Singh v. The Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar and others' and CWP No. 12600 of 2014 titled 'Dalbir Singh and others v. The Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar and others' as they arise from the common order. Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 30.11.2011 (Annexure P-5) passed by Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur exercising the powers of Collector under Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1997 and order dated 19.02.2014 (Annexure P-7) passed by Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar, whereby petitioners have been ordered to be evicted from the property in question. 1A. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 3 - Gurdwara Janam Asthan Baba Ram Thaman through its General Secretary Santokh Singh - filed a petition before the Collector, Gurdaspur, under the Punjab Religious Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1997 (for short 'the Act') for eviction of the petitioners from the property situated in the area of village Khojala, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, on the ground of unauthorized occupancy. After hearing the parties, Collector ordered eviction of the petitioners vide order dated 30.11.2011. Aggrieved against the order dated 30.11.2011, petitioners preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Jalandhar, which has also been dismissed vide order dated 19.02.2014. Hence, instant writ petition.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that orders passed by authorities below are against the law and facts on record. Collector has committed material illegalities and irregularities in the proceedings before him. The order of the Collector as well as the appellate authority are not sustainable in the eyes of law. It is further argued that application of respondent No. 3 was not maintainable under the provisions of the Act. Petitioners are in actual cultivating possession of the land in dispute and are the proprietors of the village. Earlier they had filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from interfering in their possession and dispossessing them illegally and forcibly. In that suit compromise was effected and statement dated 20.12.1997 (Annexure P-2 Colly) was made. In view of the statement of the parties before the Pre Lok Adalat, suit was dismissed vide order dated 20.12.1997 (Annexure P-2 Colly). Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the statement has not been taken into consideration by authorities below, therefore, the impugned orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law.;