Back
2008 Supreme(P&H) 1029
2008 (4) RCR(Civ) 719
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
K.S.Garewal, Daya Chaudhary, JJ.
Gram Panchayat Panj Garaian...Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab and others...Respondents
CWP No. 3976 of 2008
Decided On : 14 .05. 2008
Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. D.P.S.Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. T.P.Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.3
Mr. N.S.Virk, Additional Advocate General, Punjab
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to consider physical distance and other relevant factors in the constitution of new Gram Sabhas under Section 3 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, and the need to observe principles of natural justice in certain cases.
Headnote:
Panchayati Raj Act - Constitution of New Gram Sabhas - Section 3, 4, and Article 243 - The court discussed the constitution of new Gram Sabhas by separating them from already established Gram Sabhas under Section 3 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The court emphasized the importance of physical distance and other relevant factors in the constitution of new Gram Sabhas. The judgment also referred to the constitutional provisions under Article 243 and the interpretation of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab Vs. Tehal Singh, 2002(2) P.L.R. 347, highlighting the legislative nature of the act and the requirement of observing principles of natural justice in certain cases.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a number of petitions concerning the constitution of new Gram Sabhas by separating them from already established Gram Sabhas under Section 3 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The court examined the physical distance and other relevant factors in the constitution of new Gram Sabhas.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the constitution of new Gram Sabhas should consider physical distance and other relevant factors, emphasizing the importance of integrated development and historical factors. It also highlighted the legislative nature of the act and the requirement of observing principles of natural justice in certain cases.
Issues: The issues involved the constitution of new Gram Sabhas under Section 3 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, and the consideration of physical distance and other relevant factors.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, emphasizing the importance of physical distance and other relevant factors in the constitution of new Gram Sabhas, and the requirement of observing principles of natural justice in certain cases.
Final Decision: The court recommended the State Government to reconsider the constitution of the new Gram Sabhas before the elections are held, keeping in view the observations made in respect of six villages—Panj Garahian, Siryewala, Mangwal, Sabhra, Miaonwal, and Tibber.
K.S.GAREWAL, J. - “There is no village in India, that does not have a rich or legendary history of its own. Some god or godlike hero has passed by the village—Rama might have rested under this pipal tree, Sita might have dried her clothes, after her bath, on this yellow stone, or the Mahatama himself, on one of his many pilgrimages through the country might have slept in this hut, the low one, by the village gate. In this way the past mingles with the present, and the gods mingle with men...........” (Raja Rao in his introduction to “Kanthapura.”)
We have before us a number of petitions (CWP No. 3976 of 2008 Gram Panchayat Panj Garaian Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 4156 of 2008 Jatinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others, Gram Panchayat of Village Siryewala Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 5692 of 2008 Gram Panchayat Piareana Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 6602 of 2008 Parminder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 4643 of 2008 Tarsem Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 4092 of 2008 Gram Panchayat Village Sabhra Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 4068 of 2008 Gram Panchayat Miaonwal Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 3850 of 2008 Raj Pal Singh Bedi Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 4311 of 2008 Gram Panchayat Sohian Kalan Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 6473 of 2008 Kuldip Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 5975 of 2008 Joginder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 3765 of 2008 Kulwant Bir Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 6461 of 2008 Manjit Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 4106 of 2008 Preet Pal Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others and CWP No. 4069 of 2008 Hira Lal and others Vs. State of Punjab and others) concerning constitution of new Gram Sabhas by separating them from already established Gram Sabhas.
2. Section 3 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 entitles the State Government to declare any village or group of contiguous villages, with a population of not less than two hundred, to constitute a Gram Sabha area. However, this provision also has a proviso that a new Gram Sabha area should be constituted by taking into consideration its physical distance from the main village or villages, as the case may be and other relevant facts.
3. The Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 is a comprehensive enactment which establishes a three-tier Panchayati Raj system in the State of Punjab. The Act provides for elected bodies at the village, Block and District levels, in keeping with the provisions of the Constitution (Seventythird Amendment) Act, 1992. This is to encourage greater participation of the people and more effective implementation of rural development and Panchayati Raj system. The above mentioned constitutional amendment introduced Article Part IX for the Panchayats by enacting Article 243, 243A to 243-O. Article 243 defines a Gram Sabha to mean a body consisting of persons registered in the electorals rolls relating to a village comprised within the area of the Panchayat which has been defined as an institution of self government constituted under article 243B for rural areas.
4. The Supreme Court of India in State of Punjab Vs. Tehal Singh and others 2002(2) P.L.R. 347 laid down certain principles of law holding that provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act for declaring territortial area of a Gram Sabha did not concern the interest of an individual citizen or a particular resident of that area. The declaration under Section 3 made by the Government was general in character and not directed to a resident of a particular area. A Gram Panchayat was entrusted many general functions and numerous other powers and duties(Section 30 of the Act).
5. The Supreme Court held that making a declaration under Section 3 of the Act determining the terrotortial area of a Gram Sabha and thereafter establishing a Gram Sabha for that area was an act which was legis
