Back
2014 Supreme(P&H) 1175
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Satish Kumar Mittal, Mahavir Singh Chauhan, JJ.
Gram Panchayat Village Sihandaud - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and Ors. - Respondent
Letters Patent Appeal No. 445 of 2011
Decided On : 10-01-2014
For the Appellant :Yousaf, Advocate
For the Respondents:Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate General
Compliance with statutory requirements for property acquisition and disposal by the Gram Panchayat, and ensuring that such transactions are in the interest of the public and not for the benefit of specific individuals.
Headnote:
Land Exchange - Village Panchayat Dispute - Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Section 199(1), Section 85 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 85 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which requires prior approval of the State Government for acquisition or disposal of immovable property by the Gram Panchayat. The court found that the exchange of land by the Village Panchayat was not approved by the State Government as required by Section 85. The court also noted that the exchange of land was not for the benefit of the Village Panchayat or its residents, but rather seemed to favor private individuals. The court set aside the earlier resolution and upheld the annulment of the resolution favoring the land exchange.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute arose from the exchange of land by the Village Panchayat for the construction of a Focal Point, which involved utilizing private persons' land. The exchange was initially approved but later annulled by a new Panchayat. The matter was challenged, and the court was called upon to determine the validity of the resolutions and the exchange of land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the exchange of land was not approved by the State Government as required by Section 85 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. It also concluded that the exchange was not in the interest of the Village Panchayat or its residents, but rather seemed to favor private individuals. As a result, the court set aside the earlier resolution and upheld the annulment of the resolution favoring the land exchange.
Issues: Validity of land exchange resolution, Compliance with Section 85 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Benefit to the Village Panchayat and its residents
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the exchange of land by the Village Panchayat was not in compliance with Section 85 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, as it lacked the required prior approval of the State Government. Additionally, the court found that the exchange was not for the benefit of the Village Panchayat or its residents, leading to the decision to set aside the earlier resolution and uphold the annulment of the resolution favoring the land exchange.
Final Decision: The court accepted the appeal, set aside the earlier resolution, and upheld the annulment of the resolution favoring the land exchange.
1. By way of the instant Letters Patent Appeal Gram Panchayat Village Sihandaud, Block Dehlon, District Ludhiana, has assailed order dated 21.07.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 16922 of 2008. Factual matrix giving rise to the instant Letters Patent Appeal indicates that village Sihandaud was selected by Punjab Government for construction of Focal Point under different development schemes but while constructing the Purchase Centre, land of some private persons, including respondent No. 5-Mukhtiar Singh, was utilized by the Government. The Village Panchayat, vide resolution dated 20.02.2001 (Annexure P-1), resolved to give land measuring 13 Biswas 07 Biswasian of Panchayat land to him. However, on election of a new Panchayat, another resolution dated 28.09.2004 was passed by the Panchayat annulling the earlier resolution dated 20.02.2001 because the exchange was found by the Village Panchayat not to be for the benefit of the Panchayat. The resolution dated 28.09.2004 was forwarded by Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Dehlon to District Development and Panchayat Officer, Ludhiana, who, vide memorandum dated 18.01.2005, recommended annulment of resolution dated 20.02.2001 to the Director, Rural Development and Panchayat Officer, Chandigarh, who, vide order dated 24.05.2006 (Annexure P-7), accepted the recommendation of District Development and Panchayat Officer and annulled resolution dated 20.02.2001 by observing as under:--
"The Resolution dated 20.2.2001 which was passed by the Gram Panchayat, the same was passed for the exchange of land measuring 0-13-17 out of the total land 1-0-0 from Khasra No. 1126/1 of Sh. Ravinder Singh and Harinder Singh sons of Sh. Sukhdev Singh and Nachhatar Kaur wife of Harmel Singh equal shares residents of village Dallanwal with 0-13-07 "Pukhta" land out of total area of 1-13-15 of Shamlat land of Panchayat in Khasra No. 1171. The land which has been given by Sh. Ravinder Singh and Harinder Singh in exchange as per the Resolution, the same has been given for Constructing the "Pukka Far" of Focal Point has not been constructed there. Rather the land is lying vacant. The land of Panchayat is lying adjoining of the "far" which is given on lease/rent (Chakota) and is in possession of the Panchayat. The land which is of the Panchayat, is situated at a distance of about 4-5 Km from the "Far" of Focal Point on main road which leads to Sihan Daud. There is lot of difference of market value of these lands. As per this resolution, the case of exchange has not been sent to the Govt. for approval and neither any such approval has been granted. Under the garb of this resolution, Sh. Ravinder Singh and Harinder Singh sons of Sh. Sukhdev Singh has taken illegal possession of Panchayat land in Khasra No. 1171/1, whereas the land owned by them in Khasra No. 1126/1 is lying vacant. This way the Resolution dated 20.02.2001 passed by the Gram Panchayat for the exchange of land, is not in the public interest but the same has been passed in order to favour some special individual. Therefore, this resolution, not being in the interest of public, is not liable to be maintainable.
Therefore, I, Parkash Singh Lamhe, Joint Director conferred by virtue of Notification No. 0/22/P.A./S.2/2005 dated 4.10.2005, quash the resolution dated 20.2.2001 not being in the public interest, passed by the Gram Panchayat Sihan Daud, Tehsil Payal, Block Dehlon, District Fatehgarh Sahib (it should be in fact Ludhiana), under Section 199(1) of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994."
2. Respondent No. 4 challenged order dated 24.05.2006 before Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Rural Development and Panchayats, exercising the powers of Government, who vide order dated 28.05.2008 reversed the order dated 24.05.2006 of District Development and Panchayat Officer, quashed the resolution dated 28.09.2004 and restored the one passed on 20.02.2001.
3. Members of newly constitute
