A Gram Panchayat lacks the authority to transfer cases; jurisdiction issues must be addressed appropriately by remanding cases rather than consigning them.

JUDGMENT :

Ajay Mohan Goel, J.

By way of this petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed judgment dated 27.09.2016, passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kinnaur, in Case No. 1-2/2014, titled Gautam Singh Versus Ramesh Kumar, exercising appellate powers under Section 67 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1994 Act’), in terms whereof, the Appeal filed by the respondent herein, has been allowed by the learned Appellate Court by setting aside judgment dated 26.11.2014, passed by Judicial Bench, Gram Panchayat, Sunnam.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the appellate order is not sustainable in the eyes of law for the reason that learned Appellate Court has erred in not appreciating that the concerned Panchayat had the authority to transfer the case in terms of the provisions of Sections 40 and 43 of the 1994 Act and further in light of the fact that the complaint was filed alleging violation of the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and Schedule 3, Serial No.11 of the 1994 Act, the Appellate Court had no jurisdiction to entertain and hear the Appeal on merit. No other point was urged.

3. On the other hand, learned Senior counsel for respondent No.1 drew the attention of the Court to the documents appended with the petition, including impugned order passed by the Judicial Bench of Gram Panchayat, Sunnam, dated 26.11.2014 and submitted that therein the case was registered as a “Diwani case”, which means a “Civil Case” bearing No.1/2012. Accordingly, he submitted that as it was a “Diwani case”, registered and tried by the Judicial Bench of the Gram Panchayat, therefore, rightly the Appeal was filed in terms of Section 67 of the 1994 Act before the Sub-Judge. He further submitted that as far the findings returned by the learned Appellate Court, qua there being lack of jurisdiction with the Gram Panchayats to transfer the case, same are based on the language of Sections 30 and 43 of the 1994 Act and the same call for no interference as the findings are correct.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1 and have also gone through the order passed by the Appellate Court as well as the Judicial Bench of the Gram Pacnahayt and documents appended with the petition.

5. The order challenged in Appeal was passed by the Judicial Bench of the concerned Gram Panchayat is dated 26.11.2014. This order is on record at Page No.18 of the paper book, appended as Annexure P-4. Perusal thereof demonstrates that the matter was registered with the Gram Panchayat as “Diwani Case No. 1/2012”. This means that the case was registered as a civil case and were decided as such. Section 67 of the 1994 Act provides that any person aggrieved by an order or decree of a Bench of the Gram Panchayat, may file an Appeal within a period of 30 days from the date of such order or decree to the Judicial Magistrate/Sub-Judge, in respect of any case or suit, as the case may be and the Collector concerned in respect of any proceedings under Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1953.

6. In light of the fact that the proceedings before the Gram Panchayat were not proceedings under the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, obviously, the same were to be assailed before the Judicial Magistrate/Sub-Judge.

7. In light of the fact that the case was registered and decided as a civil case by the Judicial Bench of the Gram Panchayat, the Appeal was rightly filed before and decided by learned Civil Judge and, therefore, this Court finds no merit in the contention of the petitioner that the learned Civil Judge did not have any Authority to deal with the matter.

8. As far as the findings returned by the learned Appellate Court qua no jurisdiction being vested with the Gram Panchayat to transfer the case are concerned, this Court is of the considered view that there is no infirmity therein. In order to appreciate this aspe