SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(HP) 827

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, SATYEN VAIDYA, JJ.
Gram Panchayat Sirinagar, Block Kandaghat – Appellant
Versus
State Of Himachal Pradesh Through The Chief Secretary – Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 3450 of 2021
Decided on : 07-09-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SH. P.S, GOVERDHAN, ADVOCATE)
For the Respondent:SH. ASHOK SHARMA, SH. RAJENDER DOGRA, SH. VINOD THAKUR, SH. HEMANSHU MISRA, SH. SHIV PAL MANHANS, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERALS AND SH. BHUPINDER THAKUR, SH. VINOD CHAUHAN, ADVOCATE, adv

Headnote:

Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act, 1994 - Section 3, 4(6), 57 - Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 - Section 111(2), 112, 143 - Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj General Rules, 1997 - Rule 3 (2) - Petitioner assailed action of respondents whereby moveable and immovable assets earlier held by it have been ordered to be transferred - As per petitioner, impugned communications and order are bad in law for want of prior consent of Government of Himachal Pradesh - Petitioner has been alleged to be guilty of suppression of true and immaterial facts on ground that it had already exhausted remedy by filing CWP which was dismissed by this Court – Held, petitioner does not have any right to challenge transfer of immovable assets held by it in favour of Nagar Panchayat Kandaghat - Petitioner only has a right to claim compensation and/or share in income from income generating assets, that too if found permissible and payable under noted provisions of law - Petitioner also does not have right to run its office only from building constructed on Khasra as alleged by it - Petitioner has to maintain its office within existing jurisdiction of Gram Panchayat Sirinagar - Petitioner in no manner can gainfully run establishment of its office from a place which is outside jurisdiction of its local area - Panchayati Raj institutions are extended wings of Government - Dispute raised by petitioner in present proceedings runs counter to purpose of creation of such institutions - Petition disposed of.

ORDER :

The municipality of Nagar Panchayat Kandaghat came into being under Section 3 of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act 1994 (for short, “Municipal Act”) on publication of Notification dated 28.10.2020. Vide same notification, the Government of Himachal Pradesh declared some parts of local areas of Gram Panchayat Sirinagar and Kawarag as municipal area of Nagar Panchayat Kandaghat under Section 4(6) of the Act ibid.

3. In sequel to Constitution of Nagar Panchayat Kandaghat and inclusion of local areas of Gram Panchayat Sirinagar in said municipality, Deputy Commissioner, Solan on 15.06.2021 ordered the transfer of all assets and liabilities of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department in favour of Urban Development Department, Himachal Pradesh, pertaining to such local area of Gram Panchayats Sirinagar and Kawarag which had been declared as municipal area of Nagar Panchayat Kandaghat.

4. Petitioner, by way of instant petition, has assailed the action of respondents whereby moveable and immovable assets earlier held by it have been ordered to be transferred in the manner above mentioned and has prayed for following substantive reliefs:

    “(i). To issue writ of certiorari thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned office letters dated 15.05.2021, 17.05.2021 and 04.06.2021, Annexures P-6, P-7 P-8, and the impugned office order dated 15.06.2021, Annexure P-9, being wrong arbitrary and legally not tenable.

(ii) To issue appropriate writ, direction and order thereby restraining respondents No.1, 2 and 4 to 6 from dispossessing the petitioner from the office building (two storeyed) situated over abadi deh land comprising Khasra No.794 precisely denoted by Khasra No.794/1 (Annexure P-5), situated in Mauja Sirinagar, Tehsil Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P. and other assets mentioned in the list annexed with Annexure P-9 along with the vehicle bearing registration HP-13-3807, till the final disposal of the present writ petition”.

5. As per petitioner, the impugned communications and order are bad in law for want of prior consent of Government of Himachal Pradesh as required by Section 112 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act (for short, “Panchayati Raj Act”). Petitioner has also contended that transfer of moveable assets was without jurisdiction and authority. Further, the action of respondents in transferring the assets of petitioner in favour of Nagar Panchayat Kandaghat have been assailed to be in violation of Section 57 of the Municipal Act.

6. In addition, petitioner has also taken exception to impugned action of respondents on the ground that petitioner had only suitable place for its office in building constructed on Khasra No. 794/1 in Kandaghat and after its transfer petitioner will not be left with any other suitable and convenient place for its office.

7. Respondents while contesting the claim of petitioner have averred that action of respondents in transferring of assets from Gram Panchayat Sirinagar to Nagar Panchayat Kandaghat was perfectly legal. Petitioner has been alleged to be guilty of suppression of true and immaterial facts on the ground that it had already exhausted the remedy by filing CWP No.6044 of 2020 which was dismissed by this Court on 7.1.2021. It has been contended that funds amounting to Rs.54,23,727/- were provided by the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department in the year 2018-19 and the office building of petitioner on Khasra No.794/1 was constructed with this amount. The said asset now stands transferred to Urban Development Department on the strength of the decision of the Government in that behalf conveyed by Secretary Urban Development vide communication dated 15.05.2021. Ground of non-maintainability of petition has also been raised in view of availability of alternative remedy under section 143 of Panchayati Raj Act.

8. We have heard learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Advocate General for the state and have also gone through the records.

9. This court has already

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top