JUDGMENT Mr. Rajive Bhalla, J. (Oral) - The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing order dated 01.02.2002 (Annexure P-6), passed by Director cum Secretary, State of Punjab, Rural Development and Panchayat Department, Chandigarh (exercising the powers of the ‘Commissioner’). 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the land, in dispute, was allotted to the Gram Panchayat, by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Jalandhar, vide order dated 29.11.1962, and reserved for a veterinary hospital and Rasta Sare-a-am. The respondents are unauthorized occupants of the disputed land. The Gram Panchayat, therefore, filed an application under Section 7 of the Village Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1961 (in short, ‘1961 Act’) for their eviction. The District Development and Panchayat Officer-cum-Collector allowed the application and ordered the eviction of respondents, from the disputed land. The appellate authority has allowed the appeal, filed by private respondents, after wrongly holding that the land allotted falls in khasra No.24/77 and was allotted to the grand father of the appellants and as they have constructed houses, they can not be evicted in view of Section 4 (3) (ii) of the 1961 Act. It is further contended that the learned Commissioner did not peruse order dated 01.12.1962 passed by the Settlement Officer and has, therefore, committed an error of jurisdiction. 3. Counsel for the State of Punjab submits that as a dispute exists between the petitioner Gram Panchayat and the private respondents, the State of Punjab has no interest in the matter. 4. Counsel for respondents No.3 to 9 is not present, though it was directed, on 21.08.2012, that the writ petition shall be set down for hearing on 27.09.2012. We have, however, perused the reply filed on behalf of respondents No.3 to 9. A perusal of the reply reveals that the private respondents allege that the land, in dispute, was exchanged with the Gram Panchayat, duly reflected, in jamabandi for the year 1956-57, therefore, the land is no longer reserved for a veterinary hospital or as a Rasta Sare-a-am. It is also averred that as the private respondents have constructed their houses and the land is recorded as Gair Mumkin Abadi the Gram Panchayat has no right to evict the private respondents. 5. It is also averred that as the private respondents have constructed their houses and the land is recorded as Gair Mumkin Abadi the Gram Panchayat has no right to evict the private respondents. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner perused the reply as well as the impugned order and have no hesitation in allowing the petition, setting aside the impugned order and remitting the matter to the appellate authority to decide the matter afresh. 6. The appellate authority, while holding that the land was allotted to the private respondents’ grandfather, has not referred to much less considered order dated 29.11.1962 passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation of Holdings, Jalandhar, allotting the land, in dispute, to the Gram Panchayat. A relevant extract from the said order reads as follows :- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S. No. Name of Right holders Area excluded Area included Killas St. Area Killa St. Area ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Mohan Singh etc. No.126 Nil Nil 95//73 mw 0.1 2. Lal Singh No.218 95/73mw 0-1 95/74me 0.1 3. Raja Singh No.148 95/74me 0-1 .............Nil............. 4. Uttam Singh No.147 95/76mw 0-2 .............Nil............. 5. Nagar Panchayat ..............Nil.............. 95/76mw 0.1 96/77mw 0.1 0.2 6. Nagar Panchayat 95/77 0-1 95/76 0.1 (Sher-I-am) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. The appellate authority has committed an error of jurisdiction in disregarding order dated 29.11.1962 and relying upon pre-consolidation facts. 8. In this view of the matter, we allow the writ petition, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the appellate authority to decide the appeal, filed by the respondents, afresh in accordance with law within three months from parties putting in appearance before him on 14.02.2013. During pendency of the appeal, parties shall maintain status quo with respect to possession. ---------0.B.S.0------------