RSA-355-2015 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 223 1. Kashmir Singh State of Haryana and others 2. Kashmir Singh State of Haryana and others 3. Kashmir Singh State of Haryana and others 4. Kashmir Singh State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. being disposed of as common issue has been involved in the same. 2015 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-355-2015(O&M) Kashmir Singh Versus State of Haryana and others RSA-277-2015(O&M) Kashmir Singh Versus State of Haryana and others RSA-357-2015 (O&M) Kashmir Singh Versus State of Haryana and others RSA-2738-2012 (O&M) Kashmir Singh Versus State of Haryana and others Date of Decision: 25.03.2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the appellant(s) (in all appeals). Mr. Dushyant Saharan, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Sant Kashyap, Advocate for respondent No. 4-Gram Panchayat. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) By this common order 04 aforementioned second appeals are being disposed of as common issue has been involved in the same. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH .… Appellant .... Respondents .… Appellant .... Respondents .… Appellant .... Respondents .… Appellant .... Respondents Date of Decision: 25.03.2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA appeals). Mr. Dushyant Saharan, AAG, Haryana. Sunil Kumar, Advocate for Gram Panchayat. this common order 04 aforementioned second appeals are being disposed of as common issue has been involved in the same. this common order 04 aforementioned second appeals are RISHU KATARIA 2025.03.28 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RSA-355-2015 (O&M) 2. submits that he may be permitted to withdraw all the aforementioned appeals with liberty to file an application for revival, if, ultimately, the suit property is held to be owned by the respondents (defendants). 3. the revenue record as river, was agreed to be sold by the alleged prop below have held that the common purpose and was reserved for river, could not be sold. 4. the writ petition arising from the proceedings under Section 13A of the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Act, 1961, is pending before the High Court. The appellants’ counsel submits that if the writ petition is allowed and the property is declared to be owned and possessed by the defendants, he will file an application for revival of the appeals. 5. objection’ thereto. 6. Appeals are disposed of in terms of the observations made above. 7. disposed of. 8. connected appeals. 25.03.2025 rishu 2015 (O&M) -2- Learned counsel for the appellant (plaintiffs) (in all appeals) submits that he may be permitted to withdraw all the aforementioned appeals with liberty to file an application for revival, if, ultimately, the suit property is held to be owned by the respondents (defendants). In all the four civil suits, the property, which was recorded in the revenue record as Shamlat Deh Hasab Ra river, was agreed to be sold by the alleged prop below have held that the Shamlat Deh land, which is to be used for common purpose and was reserved for river, could not be sold. Learned counsel representing the parties do not dispute that the writ petition arising from the proceedings under Section 13A of the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Act, 1961, is pending before the High Court. The appellants’ counsel submits that if the writ petition is owed and the property is declared to be owned and possessed by the defendants, he will file an application for revival of the appeals. Learned counsel representing the respondents have ‘no objection’ thereto. Accordingly, all the aforementioned 04 Appeals are disposed of in terms of the observations made above. Pending application(s), if any, disposed of. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected appeals. .2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Learned counsel for the appellant (plaintiffs) (in all appeals) submits that he may be permitted to withdraw all the aforementioned appeals with liberty to file an application for revival, if, ultimately, the suit property is held to be owned by the respondents (defendants). In all the four civil suits, the property, which was recorded in Shamlat Deh Hasab Rasad and was reserved for river, was agreed to be sold by the alleged proprietors. Both the Courts land, which is to be used for common purpose and was reserved for river, could not be sold. ing the parties do not dispute that the writ petition arising from the proceedings under Section 13A of the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Act, 1961, is pending before the High Court. The appellants’ counsel submits that if the writ petition is owed and the property is declared to be owned and possessed by the defendants, he will file an application for revival of the appeals. Learned counsel representing the respondents have ‘no Accordingly, all the aforementioned 04 Regular Second Appeals are disposed of in terms of the observations made above. Pending application(s), if any, (in all cases) shall also stand A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Learned counsel for the appellant (plaintiffs) (in all appeals) appeals with liberty to file an application for revival, if, ultimately, the In all the four civil suits, the property, which was recorded in or rietors. Both the Courts land, which is to be used for ing the parties do not dispute that the writ petition arising from the proceedings under Section 13A of the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Act, 1961, is pending before the High Court. The appellants’ counsel submits that if the writ petition is owed and the property is declared to be owned and possessed by the Learned counsel representing the respondents have ‘no Regular Second shall also stand A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other RISHU KATARIA 2025.03.28 17:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.