Dismissed

Pawan Kumar Sharma v. Gram Panchayat

Rajasthan HC26 Apr 2018CW/8195/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order by the Additional District Collector remanding a land boundary dispute to the Gram Panchayat. The Court held that in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, such orders of remand requiring no question of law need no interference and are affirmed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed and the impugned order of the Additional District Collector is affirmed.

Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs Gram Panchayat — Public Procurement and Tenders | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writs No. 8195/2018

¶3

Pawan Kumar Sharma S/o Shri Matadeen Sharma, By Caste Brahmin, R/o Preetam Puri, Tehsil Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Gram Panchayat, Preetampuri, Panchayat Samiti Neem Ka Thana Through Sarpanch Shri Bhol Ram Lamba, S/o Prabhu Dayal, By Caste Jat, R/o Dhani Lamban, Tan Preetampuri, Panchayat Samiti Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hari Krishna Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) :

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶10

Judgment / Order

¶11

26/04/2018

¶12

By way of filing instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 23/03/2018 whereby the Additional District Collector, Sikar has quashed & set aside the decision taken by the Administrative and Permanent Establishment Committee, Panchayat Samiti, Neem-Ka-Thana and has further remanded the matter to Gram Panchayat, Pritam Puri, Panchayat Samiti NeemKa-Thana to reexamine the case, give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also conduct the boundary measurement of the disputed area.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the Administrative and Permanent Establishment Committee, Panchayat Samiti, Neem-Ka-Thana did not require to

¶14

(2 of 2)

¶15

[CW-8195/2018]

¶16

be interfered with and the order passed by the Additional District Collector, Sikar is erroneous.

¶17

Having gone through the material placed on record by the petitioner, it is apparent that the order impugned passed by the Additional District Collector, Sikar is only to the effect of remanding the matter to the Gram Panchayat, Pritam Puri to decide the matter in accordance with law by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and conducting the boundary measurement of the disputed area. The petitioner would have remedy available to him to submit his grievance before the Gram Panchayat as well as thereafter in appeal. In the limited jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, this Court would refrain from interfering with such orders of remand as there is no question of law involved in the same. The order dated 23/03/2018 passed by the Additional District Collector, Sikar is affirmed.

¶18

Consequently, the writ petition being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.

¶19

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶20

Raghu/

Pawan Kumar Sharma v. Gram Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar Sharma v. Gram Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamod Vs Assistant Engineer PWD

Rameshwar Vs Assistant Engineer PWD

Ramesh Chand Solanki Vs Smt Veenu Gupta and Ors.

Ravi Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Hansraj Meena Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Hori Lal Vs State of Raj and Ors.