The Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961

was comprised in the State of Punjab, the PunjabVillage Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1953;or(ii) in re'lation to land situated in 1[part of the territory]which immediately before the 1st November, 1956,wascomprised inthe State ofPatiala and East PunjabStates Union, the Pepsu Village Common Lands(Regulation) Act, 1954; ,(i) '~tate Government" means the Government ofthe State of[Haryana].COMMENTARYAbadi deh - Shamlat deh - House constructed by a non-proprietor on orbefore 9.1.1954 (Commencement of Shamlat law) vests in non-proprietor -Section 4 (1) (b) not governed bySection 3 (1) -Ajit Singh's case 1976 P.L.J. 489and Raghbir Singh's case 1965 C.LJ. 154 over-ruled - Tara Chand's case 1971P.L.J. 808 (D.B.) distinguished -Lachhman Singh v.Gulzari, 1984P.L.J. 27(F.B.)Abadi Deb or Gora Deb -Street or lane -Gram Panchayat isempowered tochange user ofShamlat deh vested init-Land under street for alane within abadideh or gora deh falls under the definition ofShamlat land -Order of Panchayat isnot open to challenge unless found to be malafide -Section 4 Rules 3 -A GramPanchayat iscompetent to use ghair-mumkin Rasta within Phirni or abadi deh inany manner but subject to restrictions imposed by Rule 3 of Rules 1964 -Bishambar Dayal v.State oj Haryana, 1986P.LJ. 208 (F.B.) .Bacbat land - Distribution -Petitioner Panchayat has challenged the orderof Consolidation Authorities which had ordered to distribute the""Bachat Land"among the right holders of the Village on pro rata basis as per their shares - Itwas alleged that order of distribution of the land, mutated in the name ofPanchayat, after a lapse of 38 years was illegal - Secondly Consolidationauthorities had nojurisdiction to decide adisputed question of title -Held, thereis no force in the contention - Panchayat has no jurisdiction to deal with the"Bachat Land" which belongs to the ri~ht holders of the Village - There is nolimitation bar against correction of a mIstake as in the present case - Even entryof Mutation of "Bachat land" docs not confer any title of land on Panchayat -Gram Pallchayat Village Bhedpura v.Additional Director Consolidation, Punjab,11)1J7 I-I.R.R. 10D.B.Banjar Qadim - Shamlat Taraf - Banjar Qadim land recorded as such inrevenue record cannot be held to vest in Gram Panchayat unless it is being usedfor "common purpose of the village" - Gram Pallchayat Sadhraur (Dhumma) v.Baldev Singh and Others, 1977 (?.L.J.276 (F.B.)Constitutionality -Sec. 2 of amending Act of 1992 vide which addition hasbeen made to the definition contained in See. 2 (g) of the Principal Act is ultravires the Constitution of India -A necessary consequence ofAmending Act 1992is that lands reserved under the Consolidation Act, 1948 became property ofPanchayat which is'"State" within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution -Such lands were earlier under the management of the Gram Panchayat -This actof the State to acquire the property without providing any compensation, iscomplete violation of Art. 31-A -Jai Singh v. State oj Haryana, 1995 HRR 69(F.B.) = 1995 (1) P.L.R. 614 -This judgment was set aside by Hon'ble SupremeCourt and case remitted to High Court for giving clear finding on question ofceiling limit ofrightholders -State ojHaryana v.JaiSingh, 1998HRR 585S.C.1.Substituted for the words "the territory" bythe Haryana Adaptation of Laws Order, 19682.Substituted for the word "Punjab" bythe ,Haryana Adaptation of Laws Order, 1968