In a major ruling that directly affects thousands of acres of rural land in Haryana, the Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the State government’s appeal and confirmed that “bachat land”-plots left unutilized after earmarking areas for village common purposes-cannot be taken over by Gram Panchayats. Instead, such lands must return to the original proprietors.
Background
The controversy goes back to 1992, when Haryana amended the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, through Act No. 9 of 1992. This amendment widened the scope of “shamilat deh” (village common lands) to include lands contributed during consolidation, even if they were never used for common purposes. Landowners across districts felt this was unjust, amounting to compulsory acquisition without compensation.
They approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which partly sided with them, holding that lands actually reserved for common use vested with Panchayats, but unutilized “bachat” lands must be redistributed back to contributors. The State challenged this before the Supreme Court, leading to years of litigation, including a review and rehearing of the matter.
Court’s Observations
A bench headed by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, with Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and K.V. Viswanathan, examined constitutional precedents stretching back to the 1960s. The judges recalled the landmark Bhagat Ram case, where it was held that reserving land simply for Panchayat income-without specific community use-violated the constitutional protection against uncompensated acquisition.
Read also:- Allahabad High Court Quashes Kidnapping Case Against Himanshu Dubey, Says Victim Left Home Voluntarily
The bench noted, “The land reserved for common purposes under Section 18(c)… vests with the Government or Gram Panchayat. But the lands contributed on pro-rata basis, not earmarked for common purposes in a scheme, known as bachat land, would not vest either with the State or the Gram Panchayat.”
The Court also stressed the principle of stare decisis-that settled law applied consistently over decades should not be disturbed without strong reason. With over a hundred judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court following this line, the bench found no basis to overturn it.
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Orders Husband to Pay Monthly Maintenance Despite Joblessness Claim
Decision
Concluding the matter, the Supreme Court held there was “no merit” in the State’s appeal. The ruling makes it clear that while Panchayats control lands actually reserved for schools, cremation grounds, ponds, and other public needs, they cannot claim ownership over surplus plots left unused.
The order ended with finality: “The appeal of the State is dismissed. No order as to costs.”
Case Title:The State of Haryana v. Jai Singh & Others, Civil Appeal No. 6990 of 2014
Issue: Validity of Haryana Act No. 9 of 1992 (amendment to Punjab Village Common Lands Act, 1961)
