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

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2245

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI, JJ.
Harnek Singh – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO. 22863 of 2021
Decided On : 02-06-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Rai Singh Chauhan, Advocate with Mr. Rohit Sapehiya, Advocate and Ms. Deepika Chauhan, Advocate; For the Petitioner
For the Respondent: Ms. Monika Jalota, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. B.S. Ichhewal, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 8.

Headnote:(A) Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 - Supreme Court directives in Jagpal Singh case - Encroachment on common land - Writ petition filed for a mandamus regarding illegal construction on a pond turned community hall, previously used for common purposes - Lack of locus standi of the petitioner, who failed to establish his connection to the village. (Paras 1, 10-13)

(B) Health and environmental considerations - The court acknowledged that the pond had deteriorated into a dumping ground for sullage, and thus, relocation was deemed necessary. (Paras 5, 12)

(C) Compliance with statutory provisions - The court outlined necessary actions to ensure the proper maintenance and functioning of the relocated pond while preventing future misuse of land. (Paras 12-13)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner claims encroachment on a pond by the Gram Panchayat through the construction of a community hall. The respondent revealed that the land in question was previously compromised by existing infrastructure including a school. (Paras 4-9)

Findings of Court:
The petitioner concealed material facts regarding his locus standi and the necessity of the relocation of the pond. The construction serves a communal purpose, and thus, is justified. The court deemed it essential to implement a comprehensive plan for environmental restoration. (Paras 10-13)

Issues: The court analyzed the implications of unauthorized construction on common land and compliance with the previous Supreme Court judgment regarding such matters. (Paragraphs 2, 12)

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the prior establishment of utility structures justified the modification of land use from a pond to a community center, focusing on public welfare. Thus, the actions taken were validated within the scope of necessity. (Paras 11-12)

Result: Petition disposed of with directions for action plan implementation.

Table of Content
1. petitioner requests mandamus for pond inquiry. (Para 1)
2. petitioner's argument based on supreme court judgment. (Para 2)
3. summary of notice and order issued by the court. (Para 3)
4. official respondents provide counter-reply with village details. (Para 4)
5. nri offers alternative pond location due to health hazards. (Para 5)
6. village decides to relocate pond with community support. (Para 6)
7. fundamental changes due to nri donation for public good. (Para 7)
8. community hall constructed on former pond area. (Para 8)
9. petitioner lacks standing and omitted important facts. (Para 9)
10. court further examines relocations despite concerns. (Para 10)
11. actions taken were for communal benefit, not malice. (Para 11)
12. supreme court's directives on gram sabha land usage. (Para 12)
13. court denies demolition, issues directions for new pond. (Para 13)

JUDGMENT

Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J.

Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has sought the issuance of a mandamus upon the official respondent(s) concerned, to consider the grievance of the petitioner, as carried in the representation dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure P-5), and, also to conduct an inquiry in terms of the directions, as carried in Annexure P-6, issued by the respondent No.2, on the premise that the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat concerned (respondent No.9), has constructed a community hall over the disputed pond (Chappar) in Village Badial by filling it with sand, which exists for the last more than 50 years and was used for common purposes by the inhabitants of the village concerned.

2. By placing reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in case titled "Jagpal Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others", 2011(1) ICC 742, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the factual matrix of the present case causes breach of the directions, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case (supra), therefore, he has sought the indulgence of this Court, to take stern action against the private respondent No.9 and has also sought the restoration of the disputed pond to its original condition.

3. This Court, while issuing notice of motion in the present case, had passed the hereinafter extracted order:-

    "The petitioner has approached this Court praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the grievance of the petitioner as highlighted in the representation dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure P-5), whereby the Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur was called upon to look into the matter with regard to the encroachment on the Pond (Chappar) of village Badial as the pond has been filled in and construction is being carried out on the same. It has been asserted that in the revenue record as well as the other known facts for more than 50 years, the pond was in existence which has been filled in for carrying out illegal constructions. This act on the part of the Gram Panchayat itself, amounts to encroachment on the pond i.e. Khasra No.438, in violation of the provisions of the statute as also the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Jagpal Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others, Civil Appeal No.1132 of 2011 decided on 28.01.2011' and as on to the judgment of this Court in 'CWP-9885-2020 titled as Terjinder Kumar and others v. State of Punjab and others' decided on 15.07.2020 (Annexure P-3). It has further been asserted that not only this, even the Director Rural Development and Panchayat, Punjab had vide communication dated 08.09.2021 addressed to the District Development and Panchayat Officer, Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-6) and vide letter dated 15.09.2021 sent by the Director Land Records, Punjab (Annexure P-7) to the Deputy Commissioner, Hoshiarpur had called upon these authorities to inquire into the allegations that has been made by the petitioner with regard to filling up of the pond and making construction therein but despite the same, no action has been taken. Petitioner has also approached the Deputy C

                                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
                                logo-black

                                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

                                qr

                                Scan Me!

                                India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                whatsapp-icon Back to top