Ram Dhari v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-7730-2023 -12023:PHHC:052899-DB In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CWP No. 7730 of 2023 Date of Decision: 17.4.2023 Ram Dhari .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. V.B.Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

**** SURESHWAR THAKUR , J. (ORAL) 1.

In the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has exhibited an apprehension of his being dis-possessed from the disputed land, on the strength of an order dated 28.12.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Assistant Collector First Grade-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (C), Shahabad, District Kurukshetra, in a petition under Section 7(2) of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, whereby the petitioner was found in unauthorized possession of the petition land, and, therefore, an order of eviction was made by the authority concerned.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they have filed a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority concerned, against the order dated 28.12.2022 (Annexure P-1) and the same is pending before the learned Collector concerned. He further submits that an application for interim relief has also been preferred alongwith the appeal. In case the petitioner is dispossessed from the disputed land, the whole purpose of filing the statutory appeal would be rendered infructuous.

GURPREET SINGH 2023.04.18 17:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement

CWP-7730-2023 -22023:PHHC:052899-DB 3.

Notice of motion to respondents No. 1 to 4 only at this stage. 4.

Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. A.G, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 4 and has not disputed the factum of filing of the statutory appeal. He very fairly submits that as of today, the parties may be directed to maintain status-quo during the pendency of the appeal and respondent No.2-Collector, Kurukshetra, be directed to decide the pending appeal in a time bound manner.

5.

Since the matter is pending before the statutory Appellate Authority concerned, therefore, it would not be appropriate for this Court to express any opinion on the merits of the case. 6.

Considering the above factual aspects, it would be appropriate to issue a direction to the statutory Appellate Authority concerned, to decide the statutory appeal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the concerned, by passing a speaking order. 7.

Disposed of accordingly.

8.

In the meanwhile, the parties are directed to maintain status-quo regarding possession till the decision is made upon the statutory appeal by the learned Appellate Authority concerned.

(SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE April 17, 2023 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No GURPREET SINGH 2023.04.18 17:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement