Continuing with the series on grabbing of public land brought out by the
Special Tribunal headed by Justice Kuldip Singh, The Tribune today reproduces
the operative portions of the report pertaining to Mirzapur village.
Tribune
News Service
Chandigarh, November
12
The
Special Tribunal headed by Justice Kuldip Singh disclosed how in Mirzapur, a
village known for its “khair” forests near Chandigarh, a civil court, which had
no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the land title of a suit, decided
it in an unprecedented and summary manner. The Tribunal commented that the
assumption of the jurisdiction by the civil court and its proceedings were in
utter violation of the basics of the Civil Procedure Code. Further, the Punjab
Revenue Department determined the fictitious shares without authority.
The
Special Tribunal Stated, “The Shamlat deh land in the village was mutated in
the name of Gram Panchayat vide Mutation No 570 on June 14, 1955. As per
jamabandi pertaining to the year 1962-63 (Misl Haqiat), Mirzpur village had
18,273 bigha 6 biswa of total land, out of which 16,734 bigha 10 biswa was Gram
Panchayat deh and the remaining above 1,552 bigha land was in the name of the
proprietors of the village.
"18,273
bigha 6 biswa cannot be created by applying a pro-rata cut on 1,538 bigha 10
biswas of land (which is a mathematical impossibility). Therefore, the question
of any kind of share of any proprietor in the Gram Panchayat deh could not
arise by any stretch of imagination.
“After
coming into force of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961,
where under the jurisdiction of Civil Court was barred, a few residents of
Mirzapur village filed collusive civil suit titled ‘Ami Chand and others versus
Gram Sabha village Mirzapur C/o Sehi Ram, Sarpanch’ for the declaration of the
title of 16,734 bigha 10 biswa (in the Misl Haqiat shown as 16,721 bigha 6
biswa) Gram Panchayat deh in favour of all the villagers. Suit No 208
instituted on 26.7.1962 was decided by Gurcharan Singh, PCS, Sub Judge, 1st
Class, Chandigarh, on 17.10.1962. Photo-copy of the judgement is on the record.
“In
the suit, Sarpanch Sehi Ram appeared before the court on behalf of Gram Sabha
and made a statement before the court that all the proprietors of the village,
including the plaintiffs, are owners of the case property and have been in its
possession for the last 100 years, that the land has been mutated in the name
of Gram Panchayat deh vide Mutation No 570 dated 14.6.1955 and that he admits
the suit of the plaintiffs.
“On
the basis of the statement of Sarpanch alone, the suit of the plaintiffs was
decreed within a period of three months. The operative part of the order of the
court reads, ‘In view of the statement of the defendant that he admits claim of
the plaintiffs, their case succeeds which is decreed, leaving the parties to
bear their own costs.’
“The
order was not appealed against. Needless to say that the order of the civil
court was cryptic, against the rules of natural justice and was in violation of
the specific provisions of the law.
“There
is nothing in the judgement of the civil court to show whether the Sarpanch had
any authorisation from the Gram Sabha in the form of its resolution or he filed
any written statement on behalf of the panchayat. We would further say that the
assumption of the jurisdiction by the civil court and its proceedings were in
utter violation of the basics of the Civil Procedure Code.
“As
per jamabandi of the year 1962-63, the Gram Panchayat is the owner of 16,734
bigha 10 biswa Gram Panchayat deh. The nature of the land as per jamabandi (revenue
record) is Gair Mumkin Pahar (non cultivable hill) and Gair Mumkin (Non
cultivable) Nadi (16,078 bigha 7 biswa), Banjar Jadid (5 bigha 16 biswa),
Banjar Qadim (305 bigha 9 biswa) and the remaining land is Barani (without
canal irrigation). Thus, the land was not cultivable and could not be construed
to be under the possession of any person.
“Further,
the whole of this area is covered under Sections 4 and 5 of the Punjab Land
Preservation Act, 1903. The nature of the land as per jamabandi pertaining to
the year 2003-04 is still the same and is locked under the PLPA, 1903. On the
basis of collusive decree of the civil court mentioned above, the Revenue
Department without any authority or rationale went ahead to determine the
fictitious shares of the villagers in the ratio of the proportion of the
proprietors’ land in the total proprietary land of 1,552 bigha. The net result
is that through this exercise, the Revenue Department allotted land to each of
the proprietor 11 times of original lot of land in the village. The fraud is
writ large on the face of it and there is no limitation to undo a fraudulent
transaction.
“As
the panchayat deh of 16,734 bigha 10 biswa land was not created after applying
a pro rata cut on the land of the individual landowners of the village, there
was no question of its giving back to them. The villagers are selling their
notional share in the panchayat deh through registered sale deeds every day.
This fraud is the result of the collusion between the villagers, village
panchayat, authorities and the Revenue Department.
“There
is another aspect relating to this village which may now be stated. Atma Ram,
Lambardar and others of Mirzapur village filed a petition under Section 42 of
the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act,
1948, before the Additional Director Consolidation of Holdings on October 20,
1980. In the petition it was prayed that the Shamlat deh Khewat of 15,727 bigha
9 biswa, should be partitioned among them. An objection was raised since most
of the area is mountain and could not be partitioned. The Additional Director
Consolidation, Gulbahar Singh agreed with the objection and decided that the
hilly area could not be partitioned.
“Thereafter,
the applicants raised another contention that lot of grass grows on the land
which is sold to various paper mills and its proceeds need to be distributed
among the right holders and unless the shares are mentioned, the value of the
produce, which is substantial, cannot be distributed among the share holders.
“The
Additional Director agreed with the contention and only for the purpose of
distributing the produce and its value, he mentioned the shares of the right
holders for that limited purpose only. The application under Section 42 was
disposed of on 5.3.1981. The revenue officials interpreted the order
fraudulently to the advantage of the right holders and by Mutation No 897 dated
14.12.1981 mutated the shares in the land in the name of the right holders.
This
was, prima facie, a fraud committed by the revenue authorities in connivance
with the villagers. Thereafter, the right holders started selling their shares
indiscriminately to various persons.
“Prima
facie, the following illegalities are involved in this case: The Civil Court
had no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the question of title of the suit
land, therefore, its decree is a nullity in the eye of law; The suit was
collusive and the court also decided it in a cryptic and unprecedented summary
way. The Revenue Department without any authority determined the fictitious
shares. It involves violation of PLPA 1903, Forest- Laws and Punjab Village
Common Lands (Regulation) Act 1961”.
Besides
the forest laws and regulations, the laws which were violated with impunity in
Mirzapur village were:
- Punjab
Land Preservation Act (PLPA), 1903
- Punjab
Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961
- Civil
Procedure Code
SOME
OF THE PURCHASERS ARE:
- Late
Lachhman Singh Kalka, former minister, MLA and MP and his sons Bhagat
Singh and Gajinder Singh, who purchased 157 acres and 6 kanals worth of
shares
- Jyoti
Dhir w/o Gajan Dhir (62 acres)
- Puran
Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh (33 acres 2 kanals)
- Joga
Singh - Sukhdev Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh (30 acres 3 kanals)
- Eroded
Space Design Panpam Enclave, J. K. Delhi (14 acres)
- SYSS
In space Pvt Ltd, Delhi (10 acres)
- Harman
Singh s/o Jetha (47 acres 2 kanals)
- Dyal
Ram s/o Ami Chand (45 acres 1 kanal)
- Puran
Chand s/o Ami Chand (47 acres 1 kanal)
- Jhaju
s/o Kapuria (59 acres)
- Jyoti
Gupta w/o Sandeep Gupta (13 acres 4 kanal)
- Chetan
Gupta w/o Sanjiv Gupta (14 acres)
- Harnama
s/o Sadhu (53 acres 3 kanals)
- M/S
Solidice Impact Pvt Ltd, Ludhiana (20 acres 1 kanal)
- Rajesh
Punia s/o Dharam Singh, Panchkula (21 acre 4 kanal)
- And
a large numbers of other persons
Copyright : The Tribune Trust, 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment