Major Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 17309 P&H

221          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH



                                        CWP-1794-2020
                                  Date of Decision: December 20, 2022


MAJOR SINGH                                                   ...... Petitioner


                    Versus


STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS                                    ..... Respondents


CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
        HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE


Present:     Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

             Mr. Sandeep Jain, Addl.AG, Punjab.

             Mr. J.S. Bhandohal, Advocate for respondent No. 4.


                           ****

LISA GILL, J.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner being

aggrieved of dismissal of his appeal on merits by the Joint Development

Commissioner, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab (exercising the power of

Commissioner), vide order dated 09.10.2019 in the absence of the

petitioner/his counsel.

It is submitted that petition under Section 7 of the Punjab

Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 ('1961 Act' - for short) had

been filed seeking ejectment of the petitioner and his brother (since

deceased) from the land as described therein. This petition was allowed

on 30.04.2018. It is further submitted that abovesaid petition was allowed

1 of 3

without taking into consideration the pleas raised by the petitioner including

the one that petitioner/his father was in possession of the land prior to 1950.

Appeal was filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 30.04.2018,

which was dismissed by the Commissioner on 09.10.2019 (Annexure P9).

Grievance raised is that the appeal has been decided in the

absence of the petitioner/his counsel. No opportunity to represent the case

was afforded to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner could not

have been prejudiced in this manner for non-appearance of his counsel on

the date fixed. In case, an opportunity had been afforded, all the pleas and

relevant record would have been pointed out to the authority which may

have led to a different outcome. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ghanshyam Dass Gupta vs. Makhan Lal 2012

(4) RCR (Civil) 282, wherein it is observed that the appeal should be

dismissed in default in the absence of the appellant/his counsel. The same

would provide an opportunity to the appellant by way of appropriate

application, explain the reason for non-appearance and furnish sufficient

cause thereof.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the matter,

impugned order dated 09.10.2019 is set aside and the matter is remanded to

the Joint Development Commissioner, SAS Nagar, Mohali for deciding the

matter afresh in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of

hearing of all affected/concerned parties. Application/appeal be decided

within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of

2 of 3

this order. Parties/their counsel to appear before the Joint Development

Commissioner, SAS Nagar, Mohali on 06.01.2023.

It is clarified that there is no expression of opinion on the merits

of the case.

                                                               (LISA GILL)
                                                                 JUDGE




                                                               (RITU TAGORE)
December 20, 2022                                                JUDGE
rts

               Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
               Whether reportable: Yes/No




                                    3 of 3