2008 Supreme(Guj) 70

2008 (3) GCD 1776 (Guj)
Hon’ble Smt. Justice Abhilasha Kumari
Unchidhanal Group Gram Panchayat & Ors.
Versus
State of Gujarat & Ors.
Special Civil Application No. 26742 of 2007—Decided on 26/02/2008

Important Point :
Whether in the facts bifurcation of Gram Panchayat into two sustainable and legally valid?

Headnote:Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993—Sections 7, 7(1) and 7(2) —Constitution of India, 1950—Article 243(g) —Gram Panchayat—Bifurcation into two—Notification—Challenge to—Sustainability—Finding of—Bifurcation of Unchidhanal Group of Gram Panchayat was effected by notification dated 01.10.2007 issued by State Government inconsequence to the resolution of said Panchayat dated 03.07.2004—The resolution was considered by Taluka Panchayat and thereafter it was sent to District Panchayat—It was then sent to Development Commissioner who in turn after necessary inquiry forwarded to State Government who issued impugned notification dated 01.10.2007—It is evident from the record that there has been effective, meaningful and genuine consultation as required under the law—The contention of the Counsel for the petitioner that there has been no effective and meaningful consultation cannot, therefore, be accepted—In the facts plea of Counsel for petitioner that there has been violation of principles of natural justice does not survive—The decision of bifurcation has been taken in the interest of public at large—The Counsel for petitioner invited attention to second resolution of Gram Panchayat dated 17.08.2007 which appears to be afterthought and therein only request made is that bifurcation should be postponed for a period of two years—No where in the fresh resolution it is stated that there should be no bifurcation of the Gram Panchayat at all—This second resolution is passed after a gap of only 9 days giving no reasons or any change in circumstances, therefore, it was not considered to have any force—The other contention of Counsel for petitioner that said bifurcation is likely to result in economical imbalance of the two is also not worthy of acceptance because the villagers of two Gram Panchayats have themselves submitted the application consenting to bifurcation—Court opined that impugned notification dated 01.10.2007 suffers from no legal infirmity and because the notification is result of Government Policy, therefore, no interference by the Court is warranted.

       Held :

       Subsequently, vide Resolution No. 107 dated 13.04.2006, the Resolution of the concerned Gram Panchayat for bifurcation was passed and subsequent thereto, and after the completion of all procedural requirements, as envisaged under the provisions of Section 7 of the Act, and after making the necessary inquiry, as contemplated therein, the proposal for bifurcation of the Gram Panchayat was sent to the Development Commissioner (Respondent No. 2), who in turn forwarded the proposal to the concerned Department of the State Government. It is only after following the necessary procedure that the Notification dated 01.10.2007, came to be issued. It is evident from a perusal of the documents on record that there has been effective, meaningful and genuine consultation. [Para15]

       Regarding the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners to the effect that the principles of natural justice have been violated, it is relevant to refer to the fact that the proposal for bifurcation was sent by the Sarpanch of Unchidhanal Group Gram Panchayat as well as the people of villages Tuver and Veekharan on 07.06.2004 and 03.07.2004 respectively, and acting upon the same, the procedure for bifurcation has been initiated. The representations of the people at large have not only been taken into consideration, but have also been acted upon, and it cannot be said that the people at large were not given an opportunity of being heard. [Para 16]

       The second Resolution dated 17.08.2007 appears to have been passed as an afterthought, and the only request made therein is that the bifurcation of the Gram Panchayat should be postponed for a period of two years. Nowhere it is stated that there should be no bifurcation of the Gram Panchayat at all and the subsequent Resolution dated 17.08.2007, requesting for postponement of bifurcation for two years has been passed after a gap of only 9 days. There is no change in circumstances within this period of time. It is also not stated in the subsequent Resolution dated 17.08.2007 that any change in circumstances has taken place. In view of this position there is no requirement of fresh consultation. [Para16]

       The decision to bifurcate the Gram Panchayat is a policy decision of the State Government and this Court will not interfere in a policy decision, if the same meets with the requirements of law. As there is no legal infirmity, arbitrariness or perversity in the decision to bifurcate the Petitioner No. 1 — Gram Panchayat, the interference of this Court is not warranted.

        [Para 18]

       Petition Dismissed