LexGURNAM SINGH AND ORS. versus THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL), KAITHAL AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
GURNAM SINGH AND ORS.
v.
THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER (CIVIL), KAITHAL AND ORS.
MARCH 12, 1996
B
[K. RAMASWAMY AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.]
Punjab Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 : Sections 7 and 13-B.
Punjab Common Lands (Regulation) Rules : Rules 19 and 20.
C
Tenancy and Land law~ram Panchayal-Slzamlat Dah lands-Un-
auth01ised occupant-Eviction of-Appellants in possession of lands in ques-
tion as tenant 20 years p1ior to 1975-Expily of lease in 1975-No fresh lease
gra/l/ed-High Cowt holding that Assistant Collector 1st class was em-
powered to eject appellallls and notice issued under Rule 20 was valid-Ap-
D peaHield appe//a/I/ being in ww1thorised occupation after expi1y of lease
were liable to be ejected unless they show any other legal 1ight for colltinuance
E
F
in possessio1>-Rule 19 held not ultra vires.
"-
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3200 of
1979.
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.9.79 of the Punjab &
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 5747 of 1975.
P.P. Juneja for the Appellants.
R.P. Sharma, (NP) for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division
Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court made on June 11, 1979 in
G writ petition No. 1944/79.
The admitted facts are that the appellants came into possession of
the lands in question as tenants 20 years prior to 1975 and the lease had
expired in the year 1975. Thereafter, no fresh lease was granted to the
appellants. It is not in dispute that the lands are Shamlat Deb lands vested
H in the Gram Panchayat. The High Court relying upon its earlier decision
298
GURNAM SINGH v. SUB-DIVNL. OFFICER (C)
299
has held that under Section 7 of the Punjab Common Lands (Regulation) A
,;'-.
Act, 1961 read with Rules 19 and 20 of the Rules the Assistant Collector,
1st class has been empowered to have the appellants ejected and the notice
issued under Rule 20 cannot be said to be invalid. Thus, this appeal by
special leave.
Shri P.P. Juneja, learned counsel for the appelllants, contended that B
Rule 19 is bad in law since the Act did not define as to who is an
unauthorised occupant; that Rule 19 cannot specify an unauthorised oc-
cupant; and that, therefore, it is beyond the rule making power. We find
no force in the contention
Rule 19 elaborately states thus :
"19. For the purpose of Section 7 of the Act, a person shall be
deemed to be in unauthorised occupation of any land in Shamlat
Deh:
(a) where he has, whether before or after the commencement of
the Act, entered into possession thereof, otherwise than under and
in pursuant of any allotment, leased or grant by the Panchayat; or
(b) where, he being an allottee, lessee or granatee, has by reason
c
D
of the determination or cancellation of his allotment, lease or grant E
in accordance with the terms in that behalf therein contained
ceased whether before or after the commencement of the Act, to
be entitled to occupy or hold such land in Shamlat Deh; or
(c) where any person authorised to occupy any land in Shamlat F
Deh, has whether before or after the commencement of the Act :
(i) Sublet, in contravention of the terms of allotment, lease or grant
without the permission of the Panchayat or of any other authority
competent to permit such sub-letting, the whole or any part of such
land in Shamlat Deh; or
G
(ii) Otherwise acted in contravention of any of the terms express
or implied under which he is authorised to occupy such land in
Shamlat Deh.
Explanation :
H
300
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1996J 3 S.C.R.
A
For purposes of clause {a) a person shall not merely, by reason of
the fact that he has paid any rent, be deemed to have entered into
-.-'"
possession as allottee, lessee or grantee."
Rule 20 specifies the procedure as under :
B
"20. Issue for Notice to show cause against order of eviction.
(Sections 7 and 15(2) (k)-(1). If the Assistant Collector of the Isl
grade is of opinion that any person are in unauthorised occupation
of or claim interest in the land in shamlat deb situated within his
,_
c
jurisdiction and that they should be evicted, he shall issued in the
manner hereinafter provided a notice in writing calling upon all
the persons concerned to show cause why an order of eviction
should not be made.
(2) The notice shall -
D
(a) specify the grounds on which the order of eviction is proposed
to be made; and
~
(b) require all peExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.