SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(P&H) 366

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rajesh Bindal & Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.
Gurmail Singh and others - Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others - Respondents
CWP No. 10889 of 2016 (O&M)
Decided On : 21-03-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. P.S. Bajwa, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, Mr. Harminder Singh, Mr. G.S. Nagra, Mr. Ramneek Vasudeva, Advocates.

Village Common Lands--Shamlat deh--Utilization plan of--While granting approval, it was the duty of the Panchayat Samiti to ensure that due process of law has been followed--Mere approval of the resolution cannot be legally sustained.

Headnote:(A) Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964, R.3(2)--Shamlat deh--Utilization plan of--Land permitted to be used for hospital purpose--Gram panchayat can prepare utilization plan for Shamlat deh, subject to approval of panchayat samiti--While granting approval, it was the duty of the Panchayat Samiti to have ensured that due process of law has been followed--In present case, it has failed to discharge that burden--Mere approval of the resolution has been granted--Hence, the allotment of land for use as hospital cannot be legally sustained-- Ordered accordingly. (Para 8)

       (B) Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964, R.3(2)--Shamlat deh--Utilization plan of--While granting approval, it was the duty of the Panchayat Samiti to ensure that due process of law has been followed--Mere approval of the resolution cannot be legally sustained.

       

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Bindal, J.

1. The petitioners, who are residents of village Kurrari, Tehsil and District S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) have filed the present writ petition with a grievance that no action is being taken despite repeated representations against respondent no.8- Lions Club Chandigarh Prosperity Charitable Trust, who is raising illegal construction on the land earmarked for cremation ground.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the land bearing khasra no. 1967/186, measuring 3 bighas 3 biswas, was earmarked for cremation ground, however, the same has been illegally given by respondent no.6- Gram Panchayat to respondent no.8, without following the due process of law. In fact, this was done in connivance with the Sarpanch – respondent no. 7.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the land has not been allotted to respondent no.8, rather it has merely been given for use as a hospital for the welfare of the residents of the village and other nearby areas. The cremation ground was earlier existing in khasra no. 186, however, the same was shifted from there to khasra no. 171, as the abadi of the village has extended upto khasra no.186. In fact, new cremation ground has already been constructed.

4. It was further argued that Rule 13 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964 (for short, 'the Rules'), will not be applicable in the case in hand as the land has not been allotted to respondent no.8 by way of gift. It has merely been permitted to be used for the purpose of running a charitable hospital in terms of Rule 3 of the Rules. It is for one of the purpose as envisaged in Rule 3(2)(xix) of the Rules. For the purpose, approval of the Panchayat Samiti was taken. A trust-deed was got registered, which clearly means that respondent no.8 is a recognized institution. The trust has been formed for the purpose of running the charitable hospital in the village. Allotment was made in pursuance to application filed by respondent no.8 to the Gram Panchayat as ultimately it is for the benefit of the inhabitants of the village. Government hospital is located at quite a distance. No exception should be taken by the petitioners as they are also of the same village and availing benefit of medical services being provided.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.

6. Brief facts, as have come on record, are that on an application filed on 12.3.2015 by respondent no.8 to the Gram Panchayat of village Kurrari, Tehsil and District Mohali, for allotment of land for construction of a hospital for the inhabitants, the Gram Panchayat passed a resolution on 27.8.2015, after respondent no.8 had undertaken that they will give free treatment to the patients from the village and the surrounding villages. The hospital shall be run on the basis of 'no profit no loss'. Thereafter, permission was sought from the Panchayat Samiti, which was granted vide letter dated 24.9.2015 and a trust-deed was executed on 27.9.2013, which has been signed by both the parties including the Sarpanch and other persons as its members. Some charitable activity is being carried out as is sought to be claimed.

7. There is no formal letter of allotment for right to use the land issued by the Gram Panchayat to claim that the land was either allotted or gifted to respondent no.8. It is not even the stand of the petitioners that the land has outrightly been gifted, however, the correspondence suggests that it has been given for use as a hospital. Rule 3 of the Rules deals with such a situation. It provides that the Panchayat shall prepare a land utilization plan of the land in shamlat deh vested in it. Rule 3(2) of the Rules provides the purpose for which the shamlat deh can be utilised and in terms of Rule 3(3) of the Rules, subject to approval of the Panchayat Samiti, a Panchayat may unite with any other body or bodies being a Gram Panchayat, local authority or an institution or branch of instituti






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top