Naib Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 5117 P&H

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057133-DB




CWP-8370-2023                                  2023:PHHC:057133-DB                 -1-

112
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH
                                               CWP-8370-2023
                                               Date of decision:24.04.2023

NAIB SINGH AND OTHERS
                                                                          ...Petitioners
                                      Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
                                                                       ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:    Mr. K.S. Boparai, Advocate with
            Ms. Archana Vashisht, Advocate
            for the petitioners.

            Ms. Monika Jalota, Sr. DAG, Punjab
                 ****
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioners herein suffered a verdict of eviction from the learned

Collector concerned on a petition cast, under Section 7 of the The Punjab Village

Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961. The said verdict of eviction is enclosed

as Annexure P-3.

2. The aggrieved therefrom judgment debtors concerned, petitioners

herein, made an appeal thereagainst before the learned Appellate Authority

concerned. To the statutory appeal, Appeal No.PUN/JDC/Ev/2022/1009 became

assigned. Moreover, along with the said statutory appeal, they filed an

application, claiming therein relief qua during the pendency of the above

statutory appeal, the operation of the impugned order being stayed. However,

through an order (Annexure P-10), as, made thereons, the said relief was

declined to the appellants in the above statutory appeal. The above declining of

relief to the petitioners before this Court by the learned Competent Appellate

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057133-DB

CWP-8370-2023 2023:PHHC:057133-DB -2-

Authority concerned, has led the appellants therein, to institute thereagainst the

instant petition before this Court.

3. Though the Competent Appellate Authority could well decline relief

to the applicants, upon the application (supra), claiming therein relief for staying

the operation of the impugned verdict of eviction, as became recorded against the

petitioners herein, through Annexure P-3, but only when the apposite order

became rested upon a complete, and, thorough analysis of the entire pleadings, as

became placed before it, whereafter, an objective speaking order was to be made

on the said application. However, a reading of Annexure P-10 discloses, that in a

most short shrift, and, cryptic manner the application concerned, has been

dismissed. Therefore, the dismissal of the said application is obviously done in a

most perfunctory, and, slipshod manner, and, is required to be undone.

4. Even otherwise, the learned Appellate Court concerned, may well

have considered to grant the asked for relief in the said application, and,

thereafter may have ensured, that an expeditious decision is made on the

statutory appeal (supra), rather than its proceeding to make, a dismissal order

upon the application concerned, which may ultimately, in case there, is a reversal

in the statutory appeal, of the eviction order, as, initially made against the

petitioners, through Annexure P-3, rather beget the ill consequence of

multiplicity of proceedings thus becoming generated. The above ill event may

have been obviated, whereas, it may arise upon the judgment debtors concerned,

claiming restitution of possession of the petition lands, from the Gram Panchayat

concerned, after annulment of the eviction order, especially when possession

thereof may become assumed, subjudice the statutory appeal, but in pursuance to

the dismissal order, as, made on the application concerned.

5. However, even the above principle of law governing the necessity of

a just decision being made on an application for staying the operation of the

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057133-DB

CWP-8370-2023 2023:PHHC:057133-DB -3-

impugned verdict hence subjudice the statutory appeal (supra), has not been

borne in mind rather became untenably completely overlooked, leading to gross

injustice being done to the petitioners.

6. Therefore, after allowing the instant petition, the impugned order of

07.12.2022 (Annexure P-10) is quashed, and, set aside. The learned Appellate

Authority is directed to, within two months hereafter make a lawful decision,

upon, the statutory appeal, but after hearing all affected concerned.

7. Till then status quo regarding possession of property in question in

the writ petition only, as on today, be maintained.

                                                     (SURESHWAR THAKUR)
                                                           JUDGE



24.04.2023                                            (KULDEEP TIWARI)
Ithlesh                                                    JUDGE
          Whether speaking/reasoned:-   Yes/No
          Whether reportable:           Yes/No




                                                           Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:057133-DB

                                            3 of 3