Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harbans Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 6 May, 2024
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur, Lalit Batra
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062621-DB
CWP-10372-2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
119
CWP-10372-2024
Date of Decision: 06.05.2024
Harbans Singh
..... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE LALIT BATRA
Present: Mr. Brijeshwar Singh Bhalla, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Maninder Singh Sr. DAG, Punjab.
****
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petitioner has accessed this Court for a mandamus
being made upon the respondent concerned for ensuring the removal of
illegal encroachments over the Shamlat land, comprised in Khasra No.
64//4. On the said Khasra number, there exists a public passage and it is
stated that the said encroachments have been made by co-respondent No.9.
2. It is not controverted by the learned Sr. DAG, Punjab, that the
verdicts of eviction, which became pronounced against the said respondent,
did acquire conclusive and binding effect, and, that the warrants of
possession, as became issued in respect of the said disputed passage,
however did also result, in their successful and completest execution being
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062621-DB
made.
3. Be that as it may, the present petitioner earlier instituted a
similar writ petition i.e. CWP No. 30198 of 2019 with an allegation that the
private respondent therein, but after the warrants of possession in respect of
the disputed passage became successful and completely executed, rather his
making a re-entry over the said disputed passage, and therebys yet a
mandamus was claimed to be made against the respondent concerned, to
therebys ensure that the said made re-encroachments by the judgment debtor
concerned, thus being ensured to be removed. On the said writ petition, this
Court had passed certain directions, which are contained in paragraphs 3 &
4 thereof, paras whereof became extracted hereunder :-
"3. Nonetheless, the learned counsel for the petitioner, who
was not a party in the earlier proceedings, has now accessed
this Court, with the plea, that even on khasra number (Supra),
as owned and possessed by him, there is yet an encroachment
at the instance of the encroachers concerned, and, that the said
encroachment, has not been removed at the instance of the
respondent concerned. Therefore, the learned counsel for the
petitioner prays, that the satisfaction, which has been recorded
by the learned Executing Court, rather, qua the, makings of the
completest and successful execution, of the executable orders,
hence, is infirm, as yet encroachments are existing on the land
(Supra), as, owned and possessed by the petitioner. However,
the above argument can neither be accepted nor any direction
can be issued upon the respondents concerned, to remove the
encroachment, if any, as made by the encroacher concerned,
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062621-DB
upon, the land (Supra), owned and possessed by the petitioner,
as such lands are not carried the petition land(s). Necessarily
hence, the warrants of possession, were not to be issued qua
them, as in respect thereof, no valid orders of eviction were
passed. In case yet this Court proceeds to order for the
removal of the encroachment, if any, as made at the instance of
the respondent concerned, upon the above land owned and
possessed by the petitioner, thereupon, this Court would be,
arbitrarily enforcing even against the encroachers concerned,
the mandate of the conclusive and binding verdicts (Supra),
even when thereons the petition lands become not
encapsulated. The above course is to be avoided, as thereupon,
there would be completest breach of the Rule of Law, rather
requiring that only apt binding, and conclusive lawful orders,
becoming required to be passed on the eviction petition
concerned, whereins the land owned and possessed by the
petitioner becomes also mentioned whereupon, alone, rather
the warrants of possession also covering such lands, can be
asked to be successfully and completely enforced against such
lands.
4. Therefore, at this stage, this Court does not find
any merit in the petition and is constrained to dismiss it.
Accordingly the petition is dismissed, however, liberty is
reserved to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer,
concerned, to forthwith move a petition for eviction before the
learned Collector concerned, covering the above khasra
numbers owned and possessed by the petitioner, and, on such a
petition being cast, the Collector concerned may pass a lawful
order thereon but in accordance with law."
4. A reading of the above paragraphs discloses, that even if qua
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062621-DB
the judgment debtor, thus the previously made binding and conclusive
verdicts of eviction, rather became successfully executed, yet if re-
encroachments were made over the very same lands, thereupon the apt
remedy as available to be re-coursed by the aggrieved decree-holder
Panchayat, thus was through the institution of a fresh petition of eviction,
before the Collector concerned, rather for therebys ensuring, but subsequent
to the passing of a validly recorded verdict of eviction, upon, the apposite
eviction petition, qua the said validly made decree of eviction becomes
successfully executed against the present judgment debtor concerned.
5. The said decision was made on 06.02.2022, and despite the fact
that liberty as carried in paragraph 4 thereof, became reserved to the Block
Development and Panchayat Officer concerned, but it appears that the said
petition for eviction rather has not been instituted against the judgment
debtor concerned, who made re-encroachments on the very same disputed
lands, but subsequent to the warrants of possession becoming successfully
enforced against such lands, thus in pursuance to the earlier made binding
and conclusive verdicts of eviction rather against him. In consequence,
though for the said violation by the BDPO, he is liable for proceedings in
contempt being drawn him, but since the learned senior DAG, Punjab,
submits that the said decision shall be enforced promptly, inasmuch as,
hereafters the requisite eviction shall become instituted. Consequently,
therebys this Court deems fit to not initiate any contempt proceedings
against the Block Development and Panchayat Officer concerned.
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:062621-DB
Resultantly, the Block Development and Panchayat Officer concerned, as
submitted by the learned senior Deputy Advocate General, is directed to
ensure that the eviction petition, but shall definitely within a week hereafter,
becomes instituted against the re-encroacher, upon the disputed gair
mumkin passage in Khasra No. 64//4, and, the Collector concerned upon
becoming seized with the said eviction petition, shall ensure that a valid
speaking decision becomes made thereons, but after hearing all affected
persons. The said decision shall be ensured to be made within a period of
four months hereafter.
6. Disposed of accordingly.
7. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.
(SURESHWAR THAKUR)
JUDGE
(LALIT BATRA)
JUDGE
06.05.2024
Satyawan
1. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
2. Whether reportable: Yes/No
5 of 5
