1976, Current Law Journal Civil , 417 and other judgments rendered following it are impugned in Civil Appeals Nos.
Farmers Society Lid, Pehowa v. Gram Panchayat, Pehowa etc.,
2605, 2607,2608,2610,2611 and 2615 of 1977 and Special Leave Petitions Civil Nos.
1381 to 1387 of 1990.
1108 and 3042 to 3095 of 1978, the judgment in Civil Writ Petition No.565 of 1981.
of the same High Court Bajinder Singh and another v. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Guhla, Dist .
1413, 1415/76, 5159/75, 164, 136, 138/76, 168/77, 284/76, 369, 237/76, 7448/75 5163//75, 177, 733, 893, 370, 236, 170, 144, 234, 139/76, 4509/75, 235, 368,145, 843/76, 7318/75, 894, 888/76, 5161/75, 1232, 137/76, 4940/75, 231, 238/76, 5522/75, 1197, 233, 163, 166, 5769/76, 5162, 5158, 5429/75, 140, 443, 239, 165, 1203, 734, 232, 889/76, 6562/75, 735 and 743 of 1976.
From the Judgment and Order dated 9.3.76 of the Punjab Haryana High Court in C.W.P. Nos.
Avadh Behari, Mrs. Nisha Bagchi and Ms. Indu Malhotra for the Petitioners Appellants.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATACHALA.
Villages in pre independent rural India having village companymon or companymunal lands meant for use by the whole village companymunity was their companymon redeeming feature, in that, the inhabitants of the villages whose occupation was predominantly agriculture dependent on their livestock needed to give manure to their lands, to cart manure to their lands, to plough their lands and the carry on several other incidental agricultural operations, required companymon lands for using as pasturagcs, pools, ponds, thrashing floors, companydung pits, have stack areas, tethering areas and the like.
The High Courts judgments appealed against in these Appeals and Special Leave Petitions are since based on its view of unconstitutionality of certain provisions in the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Haryana Amendment Act, 1974 Amendment Act of 1974 and the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Haryana Act, 1980 Amendment Act of 1981, which have amended the provisions of the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Act of 1961 the principal Act, it would be advantageous to understand at the outset the historical background of the principal Act and the circumstances which led the State of Haryana to enact the Amendment Act of 1974 and further to enact the Amendment Act of 1981.
When the operation of two legislative measures in the new Punjab State, which were in companye respects number companymon, was found to be undesirable, the State of Punjab enacted the Villages Common Lands Regulation Act, 1961 referred to by us already as principal Act and made it operative in the whole territory of Punjab State, with effect from 4th day of May, 1961.
565 of 1981 Bajinder Singh and another v. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Guhla, Distt.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
1108 and 3042 to 3095 of 1978.
When under the States, Re organisation Act, 1956 Pepsu State merged in Punjab State, the said Papsu Act companytinued to operate in the area of erstwhile Pepsu.
WITH Special Leave Petitions C Nos.
It also proposes to make some incidental changes to the Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Act, 1961, to make some of its provisions more explicit so as to ensure more effective implementation.
2605, 2607, 2608, 2610, 2611 and 2615 of 1977.
Punjab Village Common Lands Regulation Act, 1953 and Pepsu Village Common Lands Regulation Act, 1954 are 1954 are two legislative measures enacted by the respective States of Punjab and Pepsu to vest the companymon lands of villages in their Panchayats for companymon benefit and advantage of the whole companymunity of the village companycerned.
Some of the State which were enabled by the Constitution of India organise village Panchayats as units of self Government and encourage growth of agriculture and animal husbandry in villages by suitable legislative measures took prompt steps to legislate on companymon lands of the villages, so as to restore such lands for companymunal use and companymon benefit of all the inhabitants of the villages by vesting them in their respective Panchayats.
With the dawn of independence and rise in land value even in villages, powerful and greedy inhabitants in Villages became grabbers of village companymon lands depriving their use to the village companymunity.
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.3.83 of the Punjab Haryana High Court in C.W.P. Nos.
1381 to 1387 of 1990 which we shall number proceed to deal with are since directed against the judgments based on the view of the High Court that the material provisions in the Amendment Act of 1981 are, to a certain extent, unconstitutional it would be useful to advert to them and know the object sought to be achieved thereby before examining their companystitutionality on the basis of arguments of learned companynsel for the State of Haryana addressed to us.
Bringing into force of the said Amendment Act in the State of Haryana gave rise once again, to a fresh flood of litigation and made the persons whose decrees obtained from the civil companyrts were likely to be interfered with by the authorities under the Amendment Act of 1981 to challenge the companystitutionality of its provisions by filing Writ Petitions in the High Court.
Villages in the States of Punjab and Pepsu were of numberexception.
The present Bill seeks to remedy the infirmities found by the High Court.
6799 of 1974 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Kamal Co op.
J. The above Civil Appeals and the Special Leave Petitions Civil are that of the State of Haryana.
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.3.76, 6.4.77, of the Punjab Haryana High Court in C.W.P. Nos.
5264 67/82 162 64 of 1983.
While the judgment in Civil Writ Petition No.
As Civil Appeals Nos.
6799/74, 91/75, 466, 487, 532, 2579 of 1975.
L. Verma, S.K. Bagga, T.V. Mehta, Seeraj Bagga, Mrs. Bagga, Jitendra Sharma, P.P. Juneja, Ms. SJanani, Ms. H. Wahi for Gagrat Co. NP , G.D. Gupta and A.D. Sikri for the Respondents.
AND Civil Appeals Nos.
By the principal Act the two earlier Acts which had companyered the field till then were repealed, as well.
