E-Paper
Shamlat land: High court stays June 21 instructions of Haryana government
In June 21 instructions, the financial commissioner had said that several lands were entered into the revenue records as shamlat deh --village land reserved and used for common purpose -- and were wrongly partitioned and alienated. This was never permissible under the Act. Therefore, development and panchayats department may move to restore such land to panchayat, it stated.
The Punjab and Haryana high court has stayed operation of June 21 instructions of the Haryana government relating to reclaiming of shamlat land in village panchayats and areas under urban local bodies.
The high court bench of justice AG Masih and justice Sandeep Moudgil passed order on a clutch of pleas challenging the government instructions.
In June 21 instructions, the financial commissioner had said that several lands were entered into the revenue records as shamlat deh --village land reserved and used for common purpose -- and were wrongly partitioned and alienated. This was never permissible under the Act. Therefore, development and panchayats department may move to restore such land to panchayat, it stated.
It further read that irrespective of the description of land in revenue records, the land reserved for common purposes must be entered in the property register of gram panchayat. Also, mutations will be entered by the halqa patwari of land recorded as shamilat deh in the revenue records as per Section 2(G)(1) of the Punjab Village Common Lands Act immediately in favour of the panchayat.
The instructions were issued following a Supreme Court order in April in which it was ruled that the village common land (shamlat deh) can neither be repartitioned among the proprietors nor sold.
The allegations were that thousands of acres of common land in Haryana, was sold off by shareholders or gram panchayats for monetary gains.
The pleas in high court had claimed that instructions were issued beyond the scope of SC judgment and financial commissioner extended his jurisdiction which is not part of the judgment as well as the object of 1971 Act. The owners have been left remediless whereas the law is otherwise. The pleas also said instructions are self-contradictory and override the statute and the Act which give a complete procedure to decide the cases of land in dispute. The petitioners are permanent residents and right holders of the village land in the dispute and are in possession since from settlement, it was argued.
The matter will now be taken up on August 22.
