Petitioner challenged panchayat land auction proceedings. Court found factual dispute over possession of plots. Held that writ jurisdiction is not appropriate to adjudicate factual claims; petitioner must seek alternative remedy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8150 OF 2011 :{ 1 }:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER 07, 2012
Sanjay
.....Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others
....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH
Present: Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State.
Mr. S. P. Chahar, Advocate, for respondent Nos.5 and 6.
RANJIT SINGH, J.
The Deputy Commissioner, Sonepat, had directed Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Nakloi, to hold an auction of panchayat land. The panchayat held auction on 15.10.2010, when Sarpanch was not present. The process statedly was controlled by her husband. The petitioner states that no receipt for security deposit of `5000/- was given to the petitioner.
In the meantime, the petitioner also came to know that possession of the land auctioned to him has been given to Sat
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8150 OF 2011 :{ 2 }:
Parkash. The petitioner accordingly has filed the present petition.
This Court, while issuing notice of motion, had directed the Deputy Commissioner to file an affidavit in regard to the allegation made in the petition and the conduct of the proceedings. A detailed reply has now been filed and the Deputy Commissioner and he has stated on an affidavit that no possession of any land has been handed over to Sant Parkash. As per Deputy Commissioner, possession of plot No.25 has been handed over to the petitioner.
Counsel for the petitioner still claims that no plot has been handed over to him. If there is a dispute in regard to factual issues, then it need not be adjudicated in this writ petition. It would be appropriate for the petitioner to invoke his alternative remedy for claiming possession, if despite order it has not been handed over. As per the respondents, the possession has been handed over to the petitioner. Issuing a writ directing respondents to hand over possession to the petitioner, without determining the factual position about the claim in respect of remaining plots, would not be appropriate. The petitioner may get his right adjudicated by approaching appropriate Forum, which may include the Civil Court.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(RANJIT SINGH ) JUDGE
December 07, 2012 khurmi
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to issue a writ directing handover of land possession when factual disputes exist regarding plot numbers.
Sanjay
State of Haryana
Ranjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
