Remanded

Gram Panchayat, Manawala Khurd v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Sept 2015CWP/15392/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayats Department, Punjab, to appoint a competent authority within three months to apportion assets between concerned Gram Panchayats under Section 3 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The court barred construction at the disputed site until such orders and hearings are completed.

What did the court decide?

Direct the Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayats Department to appoint a competent authority within three months to apportion assets; bar construction at the disputed site till further orders.

Gram Panchayat, Manawala Khurd Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.15392 of 2014 Date of Decision: September 01, 2015

¶3

Gram Panchayat, Manawala-Khurd

¶4

.....Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH.

¶9

Present: Mr.Vishal Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, Additional AG, Punjab. Mr.Harpal Singh Taragarh, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

¶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

It is apparent from the contents of letter dated 24.07.2015 (P-12) of the Divisional Deputy Director, Village Development and Panchayat, Jalandhar, that firstly respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat resolved to transfer its land to a privateparty but could not do so due to stay order passed by this Court. Now, respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat has started construction of shops without awaiting for apportionment of the assets between the other stake holders-Gram Panchayats.

¶17

In this view of the matter, we direct the Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayats Department, Punjab, to take necessary steps and/or entrust the assignment to the Competent Authority, if anyone else, for apportionment of assets between the concerned Gram Panchayats in accordance

¶18

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.10 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

[2]

¶20

CWP No.15392 of 2014

¶21

with Section 3 of Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The decision shall be taken within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order and after hearing the petitioner as well as respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat. We are informed that there is one more Gram Panchayat, namely, Teja Singh Wala, who too has interest in the subject property. So, Gram Panchayat Teja Singh Wala shall also be heard before passing the final order.

¶22

The apportionment of assets between the Gram Panchayats, keeping in view the well-known parameters, is very much essential to stop infighting and for carrying-out the development works. Till such orders are passed by the State Government, respondent No.4-Gram Panchayat shall not raise any construction at the disputed site.

¶23

With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶24

Let a copy of this order be given dasti to Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for information and necessary compliance.

¶25

September 01, 2015 [JASPAL SINGH] mohinder JUD]GE

¶26

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.10 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶27

CWP No.15392 of 2014

¶28

[3]

¶29

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.10 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶30

[4]

¶31

CWP No.15392 of 2014

¶32

CM No.11418 of 2015 in CWP No.15392 of 2014

¶33

¶34

Gram Panchyat, Manawala Khurd vs. State of Punjab and others

¶35

Present : Mr.Vishal Goel, Advocate, for the applicant-petitioner. Mr.Rajesh Bhardwaj, Additional AG, Punjab. Mr.Harpal Singh Taragarh, Advocate, for respondent No.4. * * *

¶36

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions and the document (P-12) is taken on record.

¶37

CM stands disposed of.

¶38

[SURYA KANT]

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

September 01, 2015 [JASPAL SINGH] mohinder JUDGE

¶41

MOHINDER KUMAR 2015.09.10 13:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Gram Panchayat, Manawala Khurd v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gram Panchayat, Manawala Khurd v. State of Punjab and Ors.

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

Haripankaj Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Mohinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Avtar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Joginder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Hukam Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Sukhdev Singh Randhawa Vs State of Punjab and Ors.