Remanded

Surinder Kaur v. State of Punjab etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Dec 2014CWP/24517/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court treated the petitioner's unauthorized possession of Gram Panchayat land by directing her to approach the Panchayat to purchase it under Rule 4 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964, while maintaining status quo on demolition.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to approach the Gram Panchayat for purchase of the land under the statutory rules; status quo maintained.

Surinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab etc. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.24517 of 2014 Date of Decision: December 01, 2014

Surinder Kaur

.....Petitioner

versus

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH.

¶9

Present: Mr.Mohit Jaggi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

-.-

¶11

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶12

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

¶15

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶16

The petitioner appears to be in unauthorized possession of Gram Panchayat land where a residential house has been constructed since decades. The petitioner instead of disputing the ownership of Gram Panchayat, submits that she is willing to purchase the subject land in accordance with Rule4 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964 on payment of the allotment price as may be determined by the State Government.

¶17

It is not in dispute that for the purchase of subjectland, the petitioner has to firstly approach the Gram Panchayat who may pass the resolution and forward the matter to the State Government for determination of market value of the land.

¶18

In this view of the matter, we dispose of this writ petition relegating the petitioner to the above-stated remedy.

¶19

MOHINDER KUMAR 2014.12.09 12:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

[2]

¶21

CWP No.24517 of 2014

¶22

Let the petitioner approach the Gram Panchayat of the village within two weeks in this regard. If the Gram Panchayat resolves to sell the land under occupation of the petitioner, a resolution to this effect shall be passed within a period of one month and the proposal shall be forwarded to the Competent Authority who shall then take an appropriate decision in accordance with law, within a period of three months.

¶23

This order, however, shall not be construed to mean as if we have directed the Gram Panchayat or the State Government to sell the subject land in favour of the petitioner. Needless to say that an appropriate decision in this regard shall be taken by the Gram Panchayat and the State Government in accordance with law.

¶24

Till then, status-quo re: demolition or further construction at the site shall be maintained. Dasti.

¶25

December 01, 2014 [RAJ MOHAN SINGH] Mohinder JUDGE

¶26

MOHINDER KUMAR 2014.12.09 12:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Surinder Kaur v. State of Punjab etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surinder Kaur v. State of Punjab etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gram Panchayat Vill Amanipur Vs Additional Deputy Commissioner (D) Cum Collector Panchayat Lands & Ors.

Jaspal Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Chandigarh Administration and Anr. Vs Durgesh Sharma and Anr.

Hari Singh & Ors. Vs Director Rural Dev. & Ors.

Food Corporation of India Vs Addl. Director Consolidation of Holding

Imrati Devi & Anr. Vs Central Administrative Tribunal & Ors.