Summary
The Supreme Court held that the disputed land recorded as Shamlat Patti Dhera & Khubi did not vest in the village proprietary body. The absence of a comma after shamilat in the statutory exclusion could not exclude shamlat patti land from its operation. Revenue records showed cultivation by the appellant or his ancestors and no use benefiting the village community or any part of it. The contrary orders were set aside and correction of ownership entries directed.
Issues
- Whether shamlat patti land not used for community purposes fell within shamilat deh under the Haryana-applicable Act.
- Whether the missing comma in the statutory exclusion altered its scope.
Provisions considered
- Section 2(g)(3) and exclusion (v), Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, as applicable to HaryanaCommunity use according to revenue records distinguishes included common land from the relevant excluded shamlat land. (¶¶ 5, 10, 11, 12)
Held
- The omission of a comma after shamilat in exclusion (v) was a drafting mistake rather than a basis to defeat the statutory purpose. Shamilat must be read with taraf, patti, panna and thola; shamlat patti was not outside the exclusion merely because of punctuation. (¶¶ 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
- Use for the benefit of a part of the village community, including the relevant patti’s inhabitants, can suffice; use by the entire village is unnecessary. Conversely, the relevant land not used for either the whole community or such a part does not qualify under these provisions. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12)
- The revenue records consistently described the land as Shamlat Patti Dhera & Khubi, showed cultivation by the appellant or his ancestors, and did not show use for the village community or any part thereof. The later Panchayat ownership entry could not stand. (¶¶ 13, 14)
Result
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment and authorities’ orders set aside. Appellant’s name directed to be entered in the ownership column with the entry shamlat patti. Pending applications disposed of; no costs.