Back
2004 Supreme(P&H) 1211
2006 (1) LAW HERALD 0167 (P&H) (FB)
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
(FULL BENCH)
CORAM
BINOD KUMAR ROY C.J., G.S. SINGHVI, V.K. BALI, JJ.
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 14494 OF 2002
01.11.2004
Darshan Singh
Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
Respondents
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rajesh Gumber, Advocate.
For the Respondents No. 1 to 4:Mr. Randhir Singh, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.
For the Respondent No. 5 Mr. Jagdish Manchanda.
IMPORTANT POINT
Person, at whose instance enquiry is initiated against the Sarpanch or Panch of a Gram Panchayat can file an appeal under Section 51(5) of the Act
Headnote:Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 - Section 51 (5) - Appeal - Maintainability - Whether a person, at whose instance enquiry is initiated against the Sarpanch or Panch of a Gram Panchayat can file an appeal under Section 51 (5) of the Act? YES - In instant case, suspension of sarpanch for misutilization of panchayat land was revoked by Deputy Comissioner on payment of some fine - Complainant is aggrieved party and has to appeal under Section 51 (5) of the Act. (2002 (1) PLR 587, Bhagwan Singh’s case over - ruled) (Para 10)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378 (4) - Acquittal in complaint case - Appeal - Locus standi of complainant - Held, In relation to acquittal after trial based on a complaint of a person, he has been conferred a right to prefer an appeal after obtaining special leave to appeal by the High Court. (Para 9)
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 378 - State case - Acquittal - Appeal against the order of acquittal - Scope of - Held, In the cases instituted by the police, if the accused persons are tried and acquitted then the State, who is the prosecutor has been vested with a right to appeal; informant or a victim has a right to prefer a revision. (Para 9)
BINOD KUMAR ROY, C.J.
1. The petitioner, who is the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat. Senior Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, State Haryana assails validity of the order dated July 31, 2002 passed by the Financial Commissioner & Secretary to the Government Haryana, Development and Panchayat Department. Chandigarh as contained in Annexure P-11 allowing the Appeal No. 81 of 2002 filed by Respondent No. 5 and disqualifying him (the Petitioner ) to continue as Sarpanch and consequently declared his office to be vacant. While allowing the Appeal the Financial Commissioner has also over-ruled the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner that Respondent No.5 has no locus to file his Appeal.
2. Vide order dated 27.2.2003 this writ petition was admitted for its hearing by a Full Bench, which is reproduced below:-
“Whether a person, at whose instance enquiry is initiated against the Sarpanch or Panch of a Gram Panchayat under Section 51 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short, ‘the Act’), can file an appeal under Section 51(5) of the Act is the question which arises for determination in this petition filed by petitioner-Darshan Singh for quashing order dated 31.7.2002 (Annexure P.11) passed by Financial Commissioner and Secretary to Government Haryana. Development and Panchayats Department (hereinafter described as ‘the Financial Commissioner’).
The Facts :
On receipt of the complaint made by respondent No.5- Ramesh Kumar (a resident of village Seonsar) with the allegation that the petitioner, who was holding the officer of Sarpanch has unauthorisedly occupied panchayat land measuring 16 Marlas of land comprising Khewat NO. 158, Khasra No. 48/20-21. Deputy Commissioner, Kurukshetra (respondent No.3) got a preliminary enquiry conducted through Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Pehowa. On receipt of the report of preliminary enquiry. Respondent No.3 issued notice dated 18.12.2000 (Annexure P/.1) to the petitioner proposing to take action for his suspension under section 51 (1) (b) of the Act. In his reply, the petitioner denied the allegation of unauthorisedly occupying the panchayat land. After considering his reply respondent No.3 suspended the petitioner vide order dated 23.2.2001 (Annexure P.3). By another order of the same date. She ordered regular enquiry under section 51 of the Act and appointed Sub Divisional Officer (Civil). Pehowa as enquiry officer. The appeal filed by the petition against the order of suspension was dismissed by the Financial Commissioner vide his order dated 22.3.2001 (Annexure P.5). However during the pendency of the enquiry, respondent No.3 and reinstated the petitioner vide his order dated 18.11.2001. Respondent NO.5 challenged that order by filling an appeal which was allowed by the Financial Commissioner vide his order dated 6.2.2002(Annexure P.7).
In the meanwhile the enquiry officer submitted report dated 31.12.2001 with the finding that the Sarpanch had sown and reaped the wheat and rice crop in the land measuring 16 Marlas belonging to the Gram Panchayat but there is no mention of the same in the Khasra girdawari about the description of the said land either in the name of the Sarpanch or his relative. Acting on the enquiry report, respondent No.3 passed order dated 22.3.2003 virtually exonerating the petitioner, as is evident from the following extract of that order:
“ As per the above report, the Sarpanch has sown the wheat and rice crops at the time of complaint in the land measuring 16 marlas but now the Sarpanch has extinguished his possession over the said piece of land and the land in question is lying vacant at the spot. Keeping in view this position. I, Abiyax Likhi, IAS, Deputy Commissioner, Kurukshetra while exercising the powers conferred under Section 53 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 issue orders to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Pehowa to determine the loss suffered by the Sarpanch by sowing the crops in the land of the Gram Panchayat
