JUDGMENT

Sureshwar Thakur, J.

Factual Background

The petitioners made a representation, as becomes enclosed in Annexure P-2, to the BDPO Khuhian Sarwar, at Abohar. The above representation was made on 26.11.2021. The representation (Supra), encloses grievances that Jagsir Singh son of Hans Raj and Binder Singh son of Hans Raj, residents of village Kallar Khera, are in illegal possession of panchayat land, and, despite the representations awakening Raj Kumar, Sarpanch of the village (supra), to draw action against the above purported encroachers, upon the panchayat land, yet the Sarpanch concerned, failing to initiate any legal action against the encroachers concerned.

2. It appears that since representation/Annexure P-2 remained unassigned, therefore the petitioners were led to cast the instant petition before this Court.

3. The prayer made in the instant petition, is for a mandamus being issued upon respondent No. 3, to take action and decide representation/Annexure P-2, while initiating action against the pardhan/sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat concerned, under Section 20 of the PUNJAB PANCHAYATI RAJ ACT , 1994, for his derelicting in performing his lawful duties, and or, his failure to draw any action upon the encroachers concerned, despite an intimation being made to him, by the petitioners.

4. The petition was listed before this Court, on 16.03.2022, and then the hereinafter extracted orders were made thereons:-

" Petitioners have approached this Court with a grievance that private respondents No.6 and 7 have encroached upon the gram panchayat's land, which was reserved for Hadda-Rorhi of the village. The Sarpanch of village Kallar Kehra - respondent No.5 has not initiated any step for removal of the said encroachment. When nothing was done, petitioners had submitted a representation dated 26.11.2021 (Annexure P-2) to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Khuhian Sarwar at Abohar, but without any response.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from Jaswant Singh, Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Khuhian Sarwar, submits that the demarcation of the land will be carried out within a period of two weeks from today and thereafter, a decision on the representation dated 26.11.2021 (Annexure P-2) will be taken within a further period of two weeks. On this basis, he prays for an adjournment.Prayer made by the learned counsel for the State is accepted.

Adjourned to 09.05.2022."

5. Subsequently on 09.05.2022, this Court was led to make the hereinafter extracted order/directions.

" Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from Sh. Dalip Singh, Panchayat Secretary, has informed the Court that the demarcation could not be carried out till date, firstly, on an apprehension of there being a law and order situation and secondly, it has further been informed that the revenue staff, i.e. Kanungo and Patwari, has gone on strike on 04.05.2022 which is likely to last till 15.05.2022.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the State, none of these two grounds, as have been put forth by the counsel, is acceptable, firstly, the statement of the counsel for the State on 16.03.2022 in Court was that the demarcation of the land will be carried out within a period of two weeks from the date of the order, which period expired on 30.03.2022. After that, till the above-referred to revenue staff had gone on strike, there was more than a month to comply with the statement, as was made by the counsel for the State on instructions, but the authorities simply slept over the matter.

Taking care of the law and order situation is the responsibility of the State, if the authorities are unable to comply with the orders which have been passed by this Court and which they, in any case under law, are mandated to do, immediate strict action need to be taken against the persons responsible for not carrying out the mandate of the Statute and the orders of the Court.

Earlier also, in another case i.e. LPA No. 786 of 2021, vid