J.S. Khehar, J. - (1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners vehemently contends that although, issues were framed by the Collector, Kapurthala, during the course of the proceedings initiated by the petitioners under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Village Common Lands Act) and the parties led their respective evidence keeping in view the issues framed, yet while adjudicating upon the matter, neither the Collector, Kapurthala, nor the Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), exercising the powers of the Commissioner under the provisions of the Village Common Lands Act, decided the issues as had been framed by the Collector, Kapurthala. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 very fairly acknowledges the factual position asserted at the hands of the learned counsel for the petitioners. He also very fairly states, that he has no objection, if the matter is remanded so as to be decided in accordance with law, namely, a finding is recorded at the hands of the relevant authorities issue wise. In view of the above, we set aside the orders dated 31.10.2003 (Annexure P -8) and 30.3.2005 (Annexure P -10) and remand the matter for reconsideration to the Collector, Kapurthala. The rival parties are directed to appear before the Collector, Kapurthala, on 7.1.2009.
(2.) IN the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we consider it just and appropriate to direct the Collector, Kapurthala, to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible, but in any case, before 30.4.2009. Writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.;