Nafe Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Nafe Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.4 – Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal and respondent No.7 – Gram Panchayat village Gunha to decide the petitioner's representations dated 29.04.2025 by passing a speaking order after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned, preferably within one month from receipt of a copy of the order; liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the decision in accordance with law if dissatisfied.

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to respondent No.4 – Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal and respondent No.7 – Gram Panchayat village Gunha to take an early decision on the petitioner's representations dated 29.04.2025 for purchasing Gram Panchayat land held to be in the Gram Panchayat's illegal possession.

Court's answer

Without commenting on the merits, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 – Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal and respondent No.7 – Gram Panchayat village Gunha to take decision on the petitioner's representations.

Ratio / Principle

The decision on the representations is to be made by passing a speaking order after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned, preferably within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Key takeaways

If the decision is not to the satisfaction of the petitioner, he would be at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Nafe Singh v. State of Haryana and others, CWP No.11549 of 2025 (Punjab & Haryana High Court, decided 16.05.2025, Deepak Sibal and Lapita Banerji JJ.; oral judgment by Deepak Sibal, J.). The petitioner had made separate representations dated 29.04.2025 to Gram Panchayat – Gunha and the District Collector, Kaithal seeking purchase of Gram Panchayat land held to be in the Gram Panchayat's illegal possession, on the strength of Section 5A of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 read with Rule 15B of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964. Counsel confined the claim to a direction for an early decision on those representations, to which learned State counsel had no objection. Without commenting on the merits, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing respondent No.4 – Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal and respondent No.7 – Gram Panchayat village Gunha to take decision on the representations by passing a speaking order after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned, preferably within one month from receipt of a copy of the order, with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the decision in accordance with law if dissatisfied.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

( Sr. No. 106 ) CWP No.11549 of 2025 Date of decision: 16.05.2025

Nafe Singh

.....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

.....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

Present : Ms. Pinki Mehla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Saurabh Mago, DAG, Haryana.

DEEPAK SIBAL, J. ( Oral )

(1) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that through separate representations dated 29.04.2025, the petitioner has applied to Gram Panchayat – Gunha and the District Collector, Kaithal for purchasing the land of the Gram Panchayat held to be in their illegal possession and that such representations have been made on the strength of Section 5A of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 read with Rule 15B of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964.

(2) In the light of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner restricts her claim to the issuance of directions to respondent No.4 – Deputy

SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.19 18:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh

CWP No.11549 of 2025

[2]

Commissioner, Kaithal and respondent No.7 – Gram Panchayat village Gunha to take an early decision on her aforesaid representations.

(3) Learned State counsel has no objection to the acceptance of the afore alternate prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

(4) Accordingly, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 – Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal and respondent No.7 – Gram Panchayat village Gunha to take decision on the aforesaid representations moved by the petitioner, by passing a speaking order and after affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned, preferably within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

(5) Needless to add that the decision so taken be communicated to

the petitioner and if the same is not to the satisfaction of the petitioner, he would be at liberty to challenge the same, in accordance with law.

(DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE

16.05.2025 ( LAPITA BANERJI ) sunil yadav JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No

SUNIL YADAV 2025.05.19 18:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order. Chandigarh