Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
A.N.Bhandari, S.S.Dulat, Tek Chand, R.P.Khosla and I.D.Dua JJ.
Munsha Singh Dhaman Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Letter Patent Appeal No. 245 of 1958,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 5, 1959
Consolidation of Holdings - Reservation of Land for Common Purposes - Panchayat - Non-Proprietors - Constitutional Validity - East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act (Punjab Act 50 of 1948) - Punjab Gram Panchayat Act (Punjab Act 4 of 1953) - Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act (Punjab Act 1 of 1954) - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 19(1)(f), 31.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, residents of village Majatri, challenged the consolidation proceedings initiated in their village under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (Act 50 of 1948), particularly the reservation of land for common purposes, including the allotment of land to the village Panchayat and for the extension of the village abadi for non-proprietors. They contended that such reservation was beyond the scope of the Act and violated their fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
1. The reservation of land for common purposes under Section 18(c) of the Act was intended for community of interest shared by the persons constituting the estate or sub-division of an estate, and not for launching any socio-economic program of all-round and general development. 2. The reservation of land for the village Panchayat under Rule 16(ii) of the Consolidation Rules, 1949, which vested proprietary rights in the Panchayat and gave it the right to utilize the income derived from the land for the common needs and benefits of the estate, was beyond the scope of the Act and ultra vires. 3. The allotment of land to non-proprietors for the extension of the village abadi, without payment of compensation, was within the scope of the Act and did not violate the petitioners' fundamental rights.
Issues: 1. Whether the reservation of land for common purposes under Section 18(c) of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, included the allotment of land to the village Panchayat and for the extension of the village abadi for non-proprietors. 2. Whether the reservation of land for the village Panchayat under Rule 16(ii) of the Consolidation Rules, 1949, was ultra vires the Act. 3. Whether the allotment of land to non-proprietors for the extension of the village abadi, without payment of compensation, violated the petitioners' fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The purpose of the Act was to consolidate and prevent fragmentation of agricultural holdings, and the reservation of land for common purposes was intended for community of interest shared by the persons constituting the estate or sub-division of an estate. The reservation of land for the village Panchayat under Rule 16(ii) of the Consolidation Rules, 1949, which vested proprietary rights in the Panchayat and gave it the right to utilize the income derived from the land for the common needs and benefits of the estate, was beyond the scope of the Act and ultra vires. 2. The allotment of land to non-proprietors for the extension of the village abadi, without payment of compensation, was within the scope of the Act and did not violate the petitioners' fundamental rights. The extension of the village abadi was a common need of the village, and the reservation of land for that purpose was permissible under Section 18(c) of the Act.
Final Decision: The Court quashed the consolidation scheme to the extent that it reserved land for the village Panchayat, but upheld the reservation of land for the extension of the village abadi for non-proprietors. The Court also struck down Rule 16(ii) of the Consolidation Rules, 1949, as ultra vires the Act.
Tek Chand, J.
1. Munsha Singh and twenty-six others, residents of village Majatri of Tahsil Kharar, District Ambala, appellants, have moved a petition in this Court under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that consolidation proceedings which were being taken in village Majatri be quashed and proceedings for repetition, in pursuance of the consolidation might be stayed ad interim. The petition was against four respondents the State of Punjab through the Director of Consolidation. Jullundur, the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Ambala, the Consolidation Officer and the Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kharar. All the respondents were represented by the Advocate-General. This petition was heard by the Grover J. and by his order dated 23-5-1958, the petition was dismissed. The learned Singh Judge in his order of dismissal referred to his own decision in Civil Writ No. 645 of 1957 for detailed reasons. The petitioners from the order, have filed this appeal under clause 10 for the Letters Patent, which on being admitted came up before Bhandari C. J. and Dulat J. The Letters Patent Bench by its order dated 3-4-1959, expressed the view that the points of law calling for decision in this case were important and were likely to arise in a number of other cases and this appeal was, therefore, referred to Full Bench.
2. Bench dealing with the points raised before us by the learned counsel for the appellants, a brief resume of the facts stated in the writ petition, may be given.
3. The petitioners had stated, that consolidation proceedings were taken in this village in 1945, and the holdings of all the proprietors wee consolidated to the satisfaction of all concerned. The respondents again started consolidation proceedings in the village and prepared a scheme for consolidation. Under the new consolidation proceedings, the estate was notified under S. 14(1) of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act (No. 50 of 1948)--hereinafter called the Consolidation Act--as per notification No. 57-G/17943, dated 26-9-1955.
4. According to para 2 of the written statement filed on behalf of the first respondent.
"the village was taken up for fresh consolidation operations in the interest of development work in the light of new socio-economic conditions released by independence and Constitution of India".
As stated in para 3 of the written statement the following reservations have been made during the course of publication of the draft scheme under S. 18(c) in the estate.
S. No.
Details of purchase for which the
reservation has been made
Kanals, Marlas Ordinary
Area reserved.
Kanals, Marlas
Standard
1.
Village roads including Circular Road
78-3
50-4
2.
Road under the Development Scheme
with 12 karams width
36-18
29-15
3
Water tanks
1-10
1-10
4
Manure pits
7-0
5-16
5.
Hadarori
1-10
1-10
6.
Latrines
1-13
1-3
7.
Primary School and playground
for children
13-1
6-11
8.
Fuel plantation
8-0
1-0
9.
Cattle ground
6-5
3.15
10
Cremation ground for
Harijans and others
5-4
2-17
11
Graveyard
1-9
0-18
12.
Grazing ground for cattle
8-0
1-0
13.
Area given to civil Panchayat
80-0
35-12
14.
Area for extension of
abadi given to the
non-proprietors
5-5
235-18
145-17
235-19
235-20
1-18
235-21
2-7
235-22
235-23
Previous area available Area taken for various purposes from the khewat of the right-holders of the estate proportionately.......143-10.
5 Before us the items, which were subjected to serious attack on behalf of the petitioner appellants were 13 and 14. Items Nos. 1 and 2 were also criticised. The petitioners felt that their proprietary rights as also of other proprietors were being violated and thy could not in law be deprived of parts of their holdings without payment of adequate compensation. I am not referring to a number of other objections, which were raised in the petition as they are not germane to the matters finally urged before us.
6. The petition was opposed by the Punjab State, and it was u
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
