Satnam Singh v. Joint Development Commissioner And ORS.




     



 
! "#

$%&'( &)*+*',--

 .#.

&%*%*',&/ 01.

 02###.. .-

&+3',4&,%+



 
! "#

.

.

&%*%*',&/ 01.

 02###.. .-

&+3',4&,%+



!!5
! "#

6 2.

&%*%*',&/ 01.

 02###.. .-

&+3',4&,%+

0

 5
! "#

#6. .-

&%*%*',&/+ 01.

 02###.. .-

&+3',4&,%+ # 7 2#-... 6 7 2#-.62   












 
  



 

  
 
 
 

 !


 "
#
  
$ %

&&& .. 68- '







( 

)
 


)

 
*+$,'-./.,0--1
*+$,'-./2,0--1
*+$, 1'13,0--1
 
*+$,'-.3-,0--1 


 

  




%
4
 



  5

*+$,'-./.,0--1

6

  
)



 

 

( 


  

)

 
 

5
$,00
 
$,0/





6
 
8
*""
,6
)





 
 
 
 
  


 
 
''
 
1


$ %
8
* 9 
 !

'2:'
 




;

'2:'< 
!

=
 !

 
  

 

(

 

) 
 


 !










  
  
 



6
 
*  





03 '- 0--3
 

  > 7/? *
 !

0--3





 
 
 





 


 





  
 
 
 








 !


'23-
 ?


)






 !



  
)


5

 




 
 
*  

 
*  


 


  
 
 
 
 "  !




5 


 


  
)



 


 



 !


 
  


 

 

 





$  
  

@ 

 
*
  


 
 


) 



/

A)

  

 !
 
  




 

 


5
$,00 
)


 
 




 
> '.0

0--3 

# 
  
* 
$ %
* 
6 







)






-1 -:

0--:
 
)

 


5
$,0/

  


5
$,0/




 


 


 
  

 

















 
 


  *
  
) 


)


 !
 






 
     






 

 



6
 
 


 





  





)
" 

 



 


*"


 ! 

 


A


 





5 $,'0



 


 
8?

* 
 A 
$ %

 
5
 
)


 A <
 5
*





%


 (







  



 '2:'


 
%




  
 The East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1948' for short). "We have heard ld. Counsel for the parties. The Director (Consolidation) has remanded the case to the Consolidation Officer as early as on 4th June, 1996. These special leave petitions have put that order in issue. Ld.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that under the relevant statutes applicable to Punjab, the land in question vests in the Panchayat. He submits that he may be permitted to raise this plea before the Consolidation Officer. The request is justified. The petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all such pleas as are available to them before the Consolidation Officer, including the plea that the land vests in Panchayat and, therefore, the authorities under the Act have no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. With this observation, the special leave petitions are dismissed."





  

:

6




 
 
 
 


%
6


% 


 
 


 
 



 

 


5






A <
 5 *

 
 
"
 


 
5

 



A <
 5
*

"
 
(


 !
)
 



%
 ) 

 
 (



 






  
A)
 


 



'2/.

  
 

 


5
$,'7

)

(
 

 

  
 
)
 


  !



%
%

 


 



  




'2/.





%
%






  




'2:'

  
)



 )

 


 
% 




*



8%*%9&4:

  !"#

!"$"% &'"

!

 ''



"() *+  !"7


 

 





 !




A <
 5
*








 




$" <

 !




  



 '2/.
 


  

"

%


(
 
 
 

 



 
6

 
%

"


%
 

)
 



 



'2/.


 
  





  
 


 '2:'



6
 
 


 




5 
 


 





 


 


 
 
  
 !


)
 


)


  
  


)






) 





$   
 



 

*"


 !
 
  

)

 

 

 

 

6


  (
  
 


(



  
) 




  !
)




 
*"



 


5 


 


 )
 





 


7.

Therefore, as a sequel to the above, this Court does not find any merit in the instant writ petition(s), and, it accordingly stands dismissed, and, the orders impugned in the instant writ petition(s) are affirmed and maintained.

8.

All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

.. 6

   62  

  ''

-/ 0-07   +
 " ? 
B?> +
 

B?>