Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Injunction Protecting Illegal Well on Panchayat Land, Reaffirms No Protection for Encroachment on Public Property

Case Name: Kanshi Ram v. Krishan Lal and Others
Date of Judgment: October 9, 2025
Citation: RSA-3575-1998
Bench: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed a second appeal and set aside the injunction granted by the lower appellate court protecting a well built on shamlat (common) land. Justice Mandeep Pannu held that a private individual cannot claim an injunction to protect an unauthorized construction on Panchayat land, even if the structure benefits the public. The Court emphasized that no injunction can be issued to safeguard an illegal act or obstruct public rights, reaffirming that the Gram Panchayat is the lawful custodian of shamlat property.

Summary: The plaintiff, Krishan Lal, had filed a suit for permanent injunction, alleging that due to political rivalry, the defendants—led by the village Sarpanch—were threatening to remove a well he had constructed at his own expense to provide drinking water to the villagers. The defendants contested, asserting that the well was built on a public thoroughfare (phirni) belonging to the Gram Panchayat. They relied on an order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Bhiwani, dated April 2, 1992, which confirmed that the well stood on shamlat land.

The Trial Court dismissed the suit, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove ownership or possession of the site and that the land belonged to the Panchayat. On appeal, the lower appellate court reversed the decision, holding that although the plaintiff was not the owner, the defendants could not remove the well until the Panchayat constructed a replacement, since it was for public welfare.

Justice Pannu found this reasoning untenable, observing that the lower appellate court contradicted itself by acknowledging the well’s illegal location yet restraining its removal. The Court held that a civil court cannot compel the Panchayat to act in a particular manner or protect an encroachment on public land. It reiterated that any remedy lies with the Gram Panchayat, which alone has authority over shamlat property.

Decision: The High Court set aside the judgment and decree dated February 20, 1998, of the lower appellate court and restored the Trial Court’s order dated February 10, 1995, dismissing the plaintiff’s suit for injunction. The appeal was accordingly allowed.