Disposed¶16

Samim v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Apr 2025CWP/10744/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Samim v. State of Haryana and others, CWP-10744-2025 (O/M), High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (Harsh Bunger, J.), decided 21.04.2025 - writ petition withdrawn with liberty; removal of Sarpanch of village Uton, Tehsil Tauru, District Nuh; alleged unauthorised possession of Gram Panchayat land; remedy via application under Section 7, Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961; eviction; Deputy Commissioner, Nuh; mandamus under Articles 226/227.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to seek remedies under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 before the competent authorities, including the Deputy Commissioner, Nuh; pending applications ordered closed. ¶16

Samim Vs State of Haryana and Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents No. 2 and 3 (Director, Rural Development and Panchayat Department, Haryana and Deputy Commissioner, Nuh) should be directed, by way of mandamus, to remove respondent No. 6 from the post of Sarpanch of village Uton, Tehsil Tauru, District Nuh, who is alleged to be in unauthorised possession of Gram Panchayat land.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

Petition permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach the authorities under the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 by filing an application under Section 7 of the 1961 Act seeking eviction of respondent No. 6 from Gram Panchayat land, and thereafter to approach the Deputy Commissioner, Nuh for necessary relief.

¶15

Key takeaways

Pending application(s), if any, in the petition shall also stand closed.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India in which the petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents No. 2 and 3 (Director, Rural Development and Panchayat Department, Haryana and Deputy Commissioner, Nuh) to remove respondent No. 6 from the post of Sarpanch of village Uton, Tehsil Tauru, District Nuh, the respondent being alleged to be in unauthorised possession of Gram Panchayat land. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the petition with liberty instead to approach the authorities under the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 by filing an application under Section 7 of the 1961 Act seeking eviction of respondent No. 6, and thereafter to approach the Deputy Commissioner, Nuh for necessary relief. Leave was granted ('Ordered accordingly') and pending application(s), if any, were directed to stand closed. Decided orally by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Harsh Bunger on 21.04.2025.

Samim v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samim v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurvinder Singh Vs Union of India and Another

Gurwinder Singh Vs Union of India and Another

Paramjeet Singh Vs Union of India and Others

Dunish Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Jai Parkash and Others Vs Commissioner Rohtak Division Rohtak and Others

Rajender Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Others