Land Redistribution Jurisdiction Clarified by Punjab & Haryana High Court: “Question of Title Must Go to Civil Court,” Rules Bench

Share:
bail summon 90 Rule LanBail d Technical Acquittal Penalty Bail Case Transfer Citizen 80 Fines Seals Fertilizer Bail CBI Power Period Services death Law Bail Mortgage Mobile Suicide Minor protection constable Land State Girl documents seniority Claim Life Fees Rice TerminationSuicide Driving Education Family Merit Bank NDPS Costs Examination claim Teacher Regular Acquittal itbp319 job Summon payment law Property bpcl Legal payment 200 Child Abuse land Already pspcl journalist fir v summoning society cheque land officer marriage cheque prima bail act

In a significant legal ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has reinforced the necessity of addressing questions of land title before civil courts rather than consolidation authorities. The bench comprising HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR and HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE LALIT BATRA delivered a judgment on 10th January 2024, setting a clear precedent for land dispute cases.

The judgment centered around a challenge to the dismissal order under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act, 1948, concerning the repartition of disputed lands. The court observed that Consolidation Authorities lack the jurisdiction to decide questions of land title and that such issues should be brought before a competent civil court.

In its ruling, the court emphasized the need to follow legal precedent, referencing the case of ‘Parkash Singh and Others Vs. Joint Development Commissioner, Punjab and Others.’ The court stated, “It is beyond debate that if a question arises regarding any right, title, or interest in ‘Shamilat Deh,’ the only authority empowered to answer such a question is the Collector, exercising power under Section 11 of the 1961 Act.”

The judgment further dismissed the writ petition, affirming the alignment of the impugned order with established legal principles. The court reserved the right for private respondents to pursue remedies in accordance with the legal precedent.

The challenge to Annexure P-7, which pertained to the auction of Grass (Baggar) standing over the disputed land, was also deemed infructuous due to an earlier court order, which had clarified the scope of the stay.

 Date of Decision: 10.01.2024

CHUHAR CHAND AND ORS. VS ADDL. DIRECTOR CONSOLIDATION, PUNJAB AND ORS.

Download Judgment

Share: