1. Leave granted.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as for the contesting respondents.
3. The short question raised by the appellant-Gram Panchayat before us is whether the contesting respondents could have invoked the provisions of Section 42 of the Punjab Consolidation of Holdings Act (in short "the Act") after a period of almost 34 years when the consolidation proceedings were completed in the year 1959-60 and they applied under Section 42 of the Act on 20-1-1994. That question was not considered by the High Court while dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. In an identical situation a Bench of two learned Judges of this Court in civil appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 6989 of 1995 decided on 8-12-1995, has taken the view that in such circumstances the matter should be remanded to the High Court for a fresh decision also keeping in view the question of reasonableness of delay or otherwise in moving the authorities under Section 42 of the Act. Following that decision, therefore, this appeal is allowed without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversies between the parties. The writ petition is restored to the file of the High Court with a request to the High Court to proceed with the said writ petition in accordance with law and also to consider, amongst others, the question whether there was any unreasonable delay on the part of the contesting respondents in moving the authorities under Section 42 of the Act. We may also mention at this stage that learned counsel for the appellant sought reliance on another judgment of this Court rendered in Gram Panchayat v. Addl. Director, Consolidation of Holdings regarding applicability of the Punjab Village Common Land Act and the procedure to be followed in such case. As the writ petition is being restored to the file of the High Court even that question obviously will be open to be canvassed by the appellant and it will be equally open to the contesting respondents to oppose the same in accordance with law. As the appeal is being disposed of today, the interim order granted by us would naturally come to an end subject to the liberty reserved to the appellant to move for appropriate interim relief before the High Court. We also request the High Court to decide the writ petition as expeditiously as possible as the question in controversy concerns the entire village. No costs.