Punjab-Haryana High Court
Singh Ram vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 15 March, 2024
Author: G.S. Sandhawalia
Bench: G.S. Sandhawalia
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037311-DB
Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:037311-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(101) CWP-637-2021
Decided on : 15.03.2024
Singh Ram
......Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others
......Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Present: Mr. Harkirat Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Deepak Balyan, Additional Advocate General, Haryana.
*****
G.S. Sandhawalia, Acting Chief Justice (Oral) The issue in the present writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is whether the ownership of the land in dispute would revert back to the landowners on account of the fact that it has come within the municipal limits. Resultantly, the mutation sanctioned in favour of the Municipal Committee, Pehowa is subject matter of challenge. The proceedings of this petition were deferred on 10.12.2021, on account of the fact that Civil Appeal No.6990 of 2014 was listed before the Apex Court.
2. It is not disputed that in State of Haryana through Secretary to Government of Haryana Vs. Jai Singh & others, AIR 2020 (SC) 1718, the matter now stands decided. Reliance in the writ petition had been placed upon the judgment of the Full Bench passed in Jai Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others, 2003 (2) RCR (Civil) 578. Resultantly, the Apex Court has held that 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 19-03-2024 00:23:18 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037311-DB CWP-637-2021 -2- the management and control of such land vested with the Panchayat and there is no question of reverting the land to the proprietors and that if the whole or part of the Panchayat area comes within the municipal limits, the land should vest with the municipality and would not revert back to the proprietors. The Apex Court, thus, allowed the appeals filed by the State.
3. The case was earlier adjourned on 19.12.2023, only on account of the fact that the review was pending before the Apex Court. Resultantly, once the matter stands covered, we are of the considered opinion that no further directions are liable to be issued. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to move an appropriate application, in case the review application is allowed.
4. The writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly.
(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (MANISHA BATRA) 15.03.2024 JUDGE Naveen Whether speaking/reasoned : √Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes √No Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037311-DB 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 19-03-2024 00:23:18 :::