[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ajmer Singh, Shamsher Singh, Mehar ... vs Joint Development Commissioner (Ird), ... on 23 March, 2026
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
219
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-17644-1998 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 23.03.2026
Ajmer Singh and Others
... Petitioners
Versus
Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), Punjab & Ors.
... Respondents
219-1 CWP-3586-1999 (O&M)
Gram Panchayat, Dhagroli
... Petitioner
Versus
Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), Punjab & Ors.
... Respondents
219-2 CWP-3586-1999 (O&M)
Gram Panchayat, Dhagroli
... Petitioner
Versus
Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), Punjab & Ors.
... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI
Present : Mr. Amit Jain, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Chetan Slathia, Advocate
for petitioner Nos.1 to 3 in CWP-17644-1998,
for respondent Nos.2 and 3 in CWP-3586-1999 and
for respondent Nos.2 to 4 in CWP-3587-1999.
Mr. J.S. Bhandohal, Advocate and
Ms. Manveer Kaur, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP-3586-1999 and CWP-3587-1999
and for respondent No.3 in CWP-17644-1998.
Ms. Mandeep Kaur, DAG Punjab.
JITENDER KUMAR
2026.03.24 14:16
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
CWP-17644-1998 -2-
ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
1. Present order shall dispose off all the above-captioned petitions
being CWP-17644-1998 titled 'Ajmer Singh vs. Joint Development
Commissioner (IRD), Punjab & Ors.'; CWP-3586-1999 titled 'Gram
Panchayat, Village Dhagroli vs. Joint Development Commissioner (IRD),
Punjab & Ors.'; and CWP-3587-1999 titled 'Gram Panchayat, Village
Dhagroli vs. Joint Development Commissioner (IRD), Punjab & Ors.'.
2. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner Nos.1
to 3 in CWP-17644-1998 has contended that the Collector while passing the
order dated 24.05.1996 (Annexure P-4/T) in CWP-17644-1998 has
dismissed the suit in a summary manner by holding the same to be barred by
the principles of res judicata. Learned senior counsel has relied upon the
judgments of the Division Bench of this Court in the cases of Joginder
Singh & Anr. vs. Director, Rural Development and Panchayat Deptt.
Punjab & Ors. [2017 (1) RCR (Civil) 282]; Arjan Singh vs. State of
Punjab & Ors. [2013(31) RCR (Civil) 880] and Jagdish Ram & Ors. vs.
Joint Development Commissioner (IRD) & Ors. [2018(4) Law Herald
3221] to contend that a petition under Section 11 of the Punjab Village
Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1961 raises a question of title and
therefore the Collector was obliged to follow the well-established procedure
for deciding a title dispute by framing issues, making reference to evidence
led by the parties and to draw conclusions by appreciating the evidence on
the record.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-Gram
Panchayat in CWP-3586-1999 and CWP-3587-1999 has also contended that
the matter has been decided by the Collector in a summary manner without
CWP-17644-1998 -3-
framing of any issue.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. This Court in case of Joginder Singh (supra) has held as under:
"9. One cannot be oblivious of the fact that
jurisdiction of the Civil Court is expressly barred and
title disputes between proprietors and the Gram
Panchayat in respect of the land which claims to have
vested in shamlat deh, are required to be adjudicated by
the Collector under Section 11 of the 1961 Act. The
Collector is thus obligated to follow the well established
procedure for deciding a title dispute, namely, the
formation of issues, a brief reference to the evidence led
by the parties and to draw contention(s) by appreciating
the evidence on record. No such exercise has been
undertaken vide the impugned order.
10. In the light of the above discussion, we are of the
considered view that the matter requires re-adjudication
by the Collector who in turn is directed to frame the
issues and thereafter return the findings. No further
opportunity will be granted to the parties to lead further
evidence and the Collector shall decide all the issues on
the basis of the material already on record. Let the
dispute be resolved within a period of two months from
the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. In the
event of any appeal by the parties, the Appellate
Authority shall decide the same within four months."
CWP-17644-1998 -4-
6. Similar view has been taken by this Court in the cases of Arjan
Singh (supra) and Jagdish Ram (supra).
7. In view of the above and the law laid down by this Court in the
cases of Joginder Singh (supra), Arjan Singh (supra) and Jagdish Ram
(supra), we deem it appropriate to remand the matter back to the Collector
concerned for decision afresh after framing issues and affording the parties
to lead their evidence in accordance with law.
8. The parties shall appear before the Collector concerned on
06.04.2026 at 10.00 am.
9. Since the matter pertains to the year 1996, the Collector shall
decide the same within a period of six months from today, in accordance
with law.
10. The writ petitions stand disposed off in the above terms.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
( ALKA SARIN )
JUDGE
23.03.2026 ( RAMESH CHANDER DIMRI )
jk JUDGE
NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking
Whether reportable: YES/NO
