IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SURESHWAR THAKUR, KULDEEP TIWARI, JJ.
Gram Panchayat Thandran – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO. 19864 of 2020(O&M)
Decided On : 18-01-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. issuance of notice under haryana gram panchayati raj act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. breach of natural justice due to lack of notice service. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. requirements for valid actions by gram panchayat. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 4. final order regarding proceedings. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT
Sureshwar Thakur, J. (Oral)
This order will dispose of CWP-19864-2020 and CWP- 4656-2022, as they being cover common question of law.
2. The Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Thandran, village Thandran, Tehsil Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, issued, upon the private respondents herein a notice drawn under Section 24 (1) of the Haryana Gram Panchayati Raj Act , 1994 (in short 'the Act"). The contents of the said notice are extracted hereinbelow:-
Effect Of Non-Service Of Notice(Supra) Upon The Respondents Concerned:
3. Though the learned State counsel submits, that the above extracted notice, became validly served upon the respondents concerned, but he is not able to place on record any evidence, suggestive that any valid service of Annexure P-3, became caused, upon all the respondents concerned. Therefore, for want of valid service of Annexure P-3 being caused, upon the respondents concerned, thus any thereafter undertaken affirmative proceedings, at the instance of the authorities concerned, when hence ultimately resulted in a eviction order, being made qua the purported Panchayat land concerned, rather upon the respondents concerned, are all deemed to be vitiated, as they obviously became drawn in breach of the principles of natural justice, given the respondents concerned, becoming visibly condemned unheard.
4. However, at this stage, since Gurmukh Singh, one of the respondents concerned, in CWP-19864-2020 rather has admitted qua his receiving the notice concerned, therefore, in so far as, the said Gurmukh Singh, is concerned, it cannot prima facie, at this stage, be said that any affirmative action, as became drawn against him, in pursuance to Annexure P-3, hence becoming vitiated, given his purportedly becoming condemned unheard. The disputed khasra numbers are contended to fall within the ambit of inclusionary clause carried in Section 2(g)(i)(a) of 4 (a) of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (in short "the Act").
5. In pursuance to the issuance of Annexure P-3, the authorities concerned, as revealed by the reply, on affidavit, furnished to the petition on behalf of co-respondent No.5, had strived to unsuccessfully enforce the said notice, through theirs drawing Annexure P-9. The learned State counsel submits, that since some constructions were raised on lands comprised, on the disputed khasra number(s), to which khasra no.13, and, khasra no.106 becomes assigned. Therefore, he submits that since uncontestedly, the description, as made in the revenue records qua the above khasra numbers, is, of theirs being abadi deh land. Moreover, he submits that the constructions, if any, as becomes raised on the land described, in the revenue records as abadi deh land, when rather occur on the open/vacant par
Notices issued under the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act without valid demarcation are invalid; due legal processes must be followed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the petitioners to submit relevant documents to establish their entitlement to the land in question under Section 105 of the Gu....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.