Partly allowed

Raghbir Singh etc. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Feb 2013CWP/2530/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that petitioners challenging a Gram Panchayat's resolution to alter the nature of reserved land must pursue their alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 6 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, rather than seeking a writ of mandamus.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners relegated to alternative remedy of appeal under Section 6 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961.

Raghbir Singh etc. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Civil Writ Petition No.2530 of 2013 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

Civil Writ Petition No.2530 of 2013 Date of Order: 18.02.2013

¶4

Raghbir Singh and another ...Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Haryana and others ..Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL

¶8

Present: Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶9

Mr. D.Khanna, Addl. A.G.,Haryana, for respondent nos.1 and 2.

¶10

RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)

¶11

The petitioners pray for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct respondent no.3 not to change the nature of the land, in dispute, duly reserved as “Charand” during consolidation and to comply with the judgment dated 07.07.2011 (Annexure P-1), notification dated 15.09.2011 (Annexure P-2) and instructions dated 06.11.2012 (Annexure P-3), respectively.

¶12

Counsel for the petitioners submits that as the Gram Panchayat has passed a resolution, intending to change the nature of the land, in dispute, so as to allot plots under the Mahatma Gandhi Gramin Vikas Yojna, without preparing a land utilisation plan, complying with the judgment in Baljinder Singh and others v. The State of Haryana and others(Civil Writ

¶13

Civil Writ Petition No.2530 of 2013 -2- Petition No.13652 of 2009, decided on 07.07.2011 and without adhering to instructions issued by the State of Haryana, the resolution may be set aside.

¶14

A due consideration of the petitioners' arguments, in our considered opinion, raises a plea that the petitioners may validly challenge, by resort to their alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 6 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1961 Act') as applicable to the State of Haryana. Section 6 of the 1961 Act, as framed, applies to “an act or decision of Panchayat under Section 5 of the 1961 Act”. The expression “an act or decision” would necessarily include within its ambit, a resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat for the purpose of alienating its land, so as to comply with the provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi Gramin Vikas Yojna, requiring a Gram Panchayat to transfer plots by way of gift to members of Scheduled Castes etc.

¶15

In this view of the matter, the petitioners are relegated to their alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 6 of the 1961 Act. In case, the petitioners file such an appeal, it shall be considered and decided within two months of its filing.

¶16

(RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE

¶17

(REKHA MITTAL) JUDGE

¶18

February 18, 2013 nt

Raghbir Singh etc. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghbir Singh etc. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sujata Sharma Vs Bachan Singh

Hasam Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Janak Singh Vs Commissioner Ambala Division Ambala and Ors.

Mansa Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Siri Niwas & Ors. Vs Commissioner Hisar Range & Ors.

Sanjeev Kumar & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.