RSA-4624-2017 [269] Gram Panchayat of Village Gehri Devi Nagar Alias Gheri through its Sarpanch JagmannInderjit Singh and others Coram : Present: PANKAJ JAIN [1] [2] original position(s) as in civil suit plaintiff as respondent No.1. [3] over the suit land dismissed [4] allowed vide impugned restrained from dispossessing plaintiff from the suit land except in due course of law. 2017 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA Date of Decision : Gram Panchayat of Village Gehri Devi Nagar Gheri Bhagi, Tehsil and District Bathinda through its Sarpanch Gurbachan Singh versus JagmannInderjit Singh and others HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Mr. Onkar Rai, Advocate for the appellant. None for respondent No.1. **** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) Gram Panchayat is in appeal. For convenience, parties hereinafter are referred to by their original position(s) as in civil suit, i.e. appellant as defendant No.1 and plaintiff as respondent No.1. Plaintiff filed a suit asserting his possession over the suit land owned by Jumla Mushtarka dismissed by the court of first instance. Unsuccessful plaintiff preferred appeal. The same has been allowed vide impugned judgment and decree restrained from dispossessing plaintiff from the suit land except in due course of law. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-4624-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision : 01.04.2026 Gram Panchayat of Village Gehri Devi Nagar Bhagi, Tehsil and District Bathinda …Appellant ….Respondents PANKAJ JAIN Gram Panchayat is in appeal. For convenience, parties hereinafter are referred to by their i.e. appellant as defendant No.1 and Plaintiff filed a suit asserting his possession as a tenant at Will Mushtarka Malkan. The suit was Unsuccessful plaintiff preferred appeal. The same has been judgment and decree. Appellant-Panchayat has been restrained from dispossessing plaintiff from the suit land except in due 1 For convenience, parties hereinafter are referred to by their i.e. appellant as defendant No.1 and as a tenant at Will . The suit was Unsuccessful plaintiff preferred appeal. The same has been Panchayat has been restrained from dispossessing plaintiff from the suit land except in due RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.04.07 17:02 I agree to specified portions of this document RSA-4624-2017 [5] to the notice of this Court that the Panchayat initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the seeking eviction of the plaintiff. Application filed by the Gram Panchaya under Section 7 was allowed. The plaintiff preferred CWP this Court. Division Bench of this Court vide Order dated 02.05.2013 disposed off the writ petition, observing as under: [6] the Order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Writ Court 1976 Act read with of eviction was passed. [7] already resorted to eviction proceedings against the plaintiff in terms of Order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Writ Court, there is no need to 2017 (O&M) Counsel for the appellant during the course of argument brings the notice of this Court that the Panchayat initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the Panchayat Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, seeking eviction of the plaintiff. Application filed by the Gram Panchaya under Section 7 was allowed. The plaintiff preferred CWP this Court. Division Bench of this Court vide Order dated 02.05.2013 disposed off the writ petition, observing as under: “We have heard counsel for the parties. The land in admittedly Jumla Mushtarka Jumla Mushtarka Malkan is not included in shamlat any provision of the 1961 Act and as held in Singh (supra), a Gram Panchayat could not file a petition under Section 7 of the 1961 Act for eviction from land that is described as Jumla Mushtarka therefore, allowed, the impugned orders are set aside with liberty to Gram Panchayat to file a fresh petition, under the Punjab Gram Panchayat (Common Purposes Land) Eviction and Rent Recovery Act, 1976 or under the Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973. In case such petition is filed, it shall be considered and decided within three months.” During arguments counsel informed the Court the Order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Writ Court 1976 Act read with 1973 Act were initiated of eviction was passed. In view thereof, this Court already resorted to eviction proceedings against the plaintiff in terms of Order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Writ Court, there is no need to uring the course of argument brings the notice of this Court that the Panchayat initiated proceedings under Panchayat Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 seeking eviction of the plaintiff. Application filed by the Gram Panchaya under Section 7 was allowed. The plaintiff preferred CWP-395-2013 before this Court. Division Bench of this Court vide Order dated 02.05.2013 disposed off the writ petition, observing as under:- We have heard counsel for the parties. The land in dispute is Mushtarka Malkan. The land described as Malkan is not included in shamlat deh under any provision of the 1961 Act and as held in Surti @ Surat (supra), a Gram Panchayat could not file a petition ion 7 of the 1961 Act for eviction from land that is Mushtarka Malkan. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed, the impugned orders are set aside with liberty to Gram Panchayat to file a fresh petition, under the (Common Purposes Land) Eviction and Rent Recovery Act, 1976 or under the Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973. In case such petition is filed, it shall be considered and decided within three nsel informed the Court that pursuant to the Order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Writ Court, proceedings under the 1973 Act were initiated against respondents. The order In view thereof, this Court finds that once Panchayat has already resorted to eviction proceedings against the plaintiff in terms of Order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Writ Court, there is no need to 2 uring the course of argument brings the notice of this Court that the Panchayat initiated proceedings under 1961 seeking eviction of the plaintiff. Application filed by the Gram Panchayat 2013 before this Court. Division Bench of this Court vide Order dated 02.05.2013 dispute is Malkan. The land described as deh under Surti @ Surat (supra), a Gram Panchayat could not file a petition ion 7 of the 1961 Act for eviction from land that is Malkan. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed, the impugned orders are set aside with liberty to Gram Panchayat to file a fresh petition, under the (Common Purposes Land) Eviction and Rent Recovery Act, 1976 or under the Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973. In case such petition is filed, it shall be considered and decided within three that pursuant to proceedings under the order finds that once Panchayat has already resorted to eviction proceedings against the plaintiff in terms of Order dated 02.05.2013 passed by the Writ Court, there is no need to RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.04.07 17:02 I agree to specified portions of this document RSA-4624-2017 entertain the present appeal Gram Panchayat in due course of law. of law, no order is required to be passed in the present appeal. [8] off. [9] disposed off 01.04.2026 ‘R. Sharma' 2017 (O&M) entertain the present appeal. By way of impugned judgment and decree, nchayat has been restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff except in due course of law. Once the appellant has already resorted to due course of law, no order is required to be passed in the present appeal. With the aforesaid observations, the p All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed off. 01.04.2026 Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable . By way of impugned judgment and decree, restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff except Once the appellant has already resorted to due course of law, no order is required to be passed in the present appeal. With the aforesaid observations, the present appeal is disposed All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands (PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE : Yes/No : Yes/No 3 . By way of impugned judgment and decree, the restrained from dispossessing the plaintiff except Once the appellant has already resorted to due course disposed All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands RAJNEESH SHARMA 2026.04.07 17:02 I agree to specified portions of this document