Disposed

Jarnail Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Feb 2015CWP/3418/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging eviction orders against petitioners who exceeded their one-year lease on Gram Panchayat land. The Court directed deposit of market-charged user fees to allow retention of possession until wheat harvest, with subsequent handover.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to retain land till wheat harvest if they deposit user charges at Rs.26,000 per acre per year within one week; subject to criminal trespass proceedings if they fail to vacate the

Jarnail Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and… — Landlord and Tenant | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.3418 of 2015 Date of Decision: February 25, 2015

¶3

Jarnail Singh and others versus State of Punjab and others

¶4

.....Petitioners

¶5

.....Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.

¶7

Present:Mr.Balram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Mohinder Singh Joshi, Advocate, for respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat.

¶8

-.-

¶9

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶10

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶11

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶12

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶13

The petitioners impugn the orders dated 24.09.2014 and 22.01.2015 whereby they have been ordered to be evicted from the Gram Panchayat land under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 and their appeal against the eviction order has also been dismissed.

¶14

The Gram Panchayat is on caveat.

¶15

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

¶16

Both the authorities have categorically held that the petitioners took the land on lease from the Gram Panchayat for a period of one year i.e., for the year 2011-12. The land is measuring 38 kanal 18 marla.

¶17

As the petitioners refused to hand-over physical vacant possession despite the expiry of lease period, the Gram Panchayat had to initiate the eviction proceedings.

¶18

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.03.03 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

CWP No.3418 of 2015

¶20

[2]

¶21

It is pointed out by learned counsel for the respondent-Gram Panchayat that the adjoining land owned by the Gram Panchayat has been auctioned at the rates ranging from Rs.26,000/- to Rs.35,000/- per acre per year, whereas, the petitioners are enjoying possession of the land in dispute on payment of less than Rs.9000/- per acre per year.

¶22

Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since wheat crop has been sown, the petitioners may be permitted to harvest that crop on such reasonable terms and conditions as may be fixed by this Court.

¶23

Taking into consideration the totality of circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition in the following terms:-

¶24

(i) The petitioners shall deposit the lease money/user charges @ Rs.26,000/- per acre per year for the period exceeding the original lease period of one year, within a period of one week from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order, before the B.D.P.O., Sanaur, Tehsil and District Patiala, who shall then transmit the same to the Gram Panchayat;

¶25

(ii) If the petitioners comply with the direction No.(i) above, they shall be permitted to retain possession of the subject land till the wheat crop, presently sown, is harvested;

¶26

(iii) If the petitioners fail to deposit the abovestated user charges/lease amount within the stipulated period, the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala and other authorities are directed to

¶27

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.03.03 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶28

CWP No.3418 of 2015

¶29

[3]

¶30

dispossess the petitioners forthwith and hand-over physical possession of the subject land alongwith wheat crop to the Gram Panchayat;

¶31

(iv) The petitioners shall have to give an undertaking before the B.D.P.O., Sanaur, that after harvesting the wheat crop, they shall hand-over peaceful vacant possession of the land to the Gram Panchayat within one week;

¶32

(v) If the petitioners fail to honour direction No. (iv) above, we direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala, to treat it a case of criminal trespassing on the Gram Panchayat land and proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law.

¶33

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

Dasti.

¶35

February 25, 2015 [RAJ MOHAN SINGH]

¶36

Mohinder JUDGE

¶37

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.03.03 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Jarnail Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jarnail Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganpat Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sanjeev etc. Vs State of Haryana etc.

Gurnam Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ram Acchal and Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Nathu Ram Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Kulwinder Kaur & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.