Punjab-Haryana High Court
Satyabir vs State Of Haryana And Others on 18 November, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153541
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-31010-2014 (O&M)
Date of decision : 18.11.2024
.11.2024
SATYABIR
...Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER
Present : Mr. Anil Kumar Rana,, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Ms. Upasana Dhawan, A.A.G., Haryana.
HARSH BUNGER, J. [ORAL]
Petitioner (Satyabir)) has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia alia,, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus, mandamus, directing respondents No.2 and 4 to pass an appropriate speaking order as per Section 51(3)(b) and 51(3)(c) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 to suspend/remove Sarpanch (respondent No.6) and Panch (respondent nt No.7) of Gram Panchayat, Village Talot, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahendergarh, Haryana, from their positions.
2. Briefly, in the year 2022, respondent espondent No Nos.. 6 and 7 herein were elected as Sarpanch and Panch, Panch respectively of Gram Panchayat,, Village illage Talot, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahendergarh. It is stated that at the time of elections, an affidavit as well as declarations were filed by respondent espondent Nos.
No . 6 and 7 herein that they have not encroached upon Gram Panchayat's Panchayat land.
1/33
1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 30-11-2024 04:33:24 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153541
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he filed an application dated 24.04.2024 before the concerned Tehsildar seeking demarcation of Gram Panchayat land, whereupon a demarcation was carried out and as per demarcation report dated 01.05.2024 (Annexure P-5), it was revealed that family members of respondents No. 6 and 7 herein had encroached upon Gram Panchayat's land by constructing pucca houses and respondents No. 6 and 7 were residing therein.
3.1 It is stated that on the basis of this demarcation report dated 01.05.2024 (Annexure P-5), petitioner filed a complaint dated 29.05.2024 (Annexure P-6) to Deputy Commissioner, Narnaul to take appropriate action against respondents No. 6 and 7, under section 51(3)(b) and 51(3)(c) of Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (in short 'the 1994 Act'); however no action has been taken. Hence, the present writ petition.
4. Heard.
5. Having considered the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that there are certain disputed questions of fact involved in the instant petition, as are also in the demarcation report (Annexure P-5), and the said disputed questions of fact, cannot be settled in the present proceedings under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. It is not disputed before this Court that the so-called encroachers (who are stated to be related to respondents No. 6 and 7) were not present at the time of demarcation and neither any eviction order has been passed against the so-called encroachers by any Court of competent jurisdiction. It is also not disputed that in terms of Section 7 of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 (in short "the 1961 Act"), any resident of the village can also seek eviction of unauthorised occupants on Gram Panchayat's land. It goes without saying that upon a lawful order 2/3 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 30-11-2024 04:33:25 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153541 of eviction being passed against the encroachers concerned and with further evidence that the encroachers are not only related to respondents No. 6 and 7 but are also amenable to action by competent authorities for their removal or suspension, from their democratically elected offices in terms of judicial pronouncement in case of Janabai v. Additional Commissioner, 2018 AIR (SC) 5068.
6. Thus, at this stage, this Court, does not deem it fit and appropriate to determine the aforesaid disputed question(s) of fact.
7. In the above circumstances, the present petition is dismissed; however, leaving it open to the petitioner to institute appropriate proceedings (if so advised), for eviction of encroachers from Gram Panchayat's land under Section 7 of the 1961 Act and upon an eviction order being passed against the encroachers, the petitioner would also be at liberty to approach the concerned/competent authority under the 1994 Act, for passing of an appropriate order of removal/suspension upon the errant Panch or the Sarpanch concerned, in case, they become amenable to such action in terms of judgment rendered in Janabai's case (supra).
8. All pending applications (if any) shall also stand closed.
November 18, 2024 (HARSH BUNGER)
gurpreet JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3/3
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 30-11-2024 04:33:25 :::