Moti Ram vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 2383 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9684/2020

Moti Ram S/o Sh. Magaram, Aged About 69 Years, Resident Of Village Saiyon Ka Tala, Lunada, Tehsil Baytu, District Barmer (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary To The Government Revenue Department, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. District Collector, Barmer.

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Baytu, District Barmer.

4. Gram Panchayat, Saiyon Ka Tala, Tehsil Baytu, District Barmer, Through Its Sarpanch.

                                                                      ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)              :     Mr. B.S. Sandhu
For Respondent(s)              :     Mr. Sunil Beniwal, AAG assisted by
                                     Mr. D.K. Godara



             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

                                          Order

10/02/2022

The present PIL has been filed challenging the order whereby

the land comprising of Khasra No.1572 of village Saiyon Ka Tala

has been allotted for the purpose of construction of Panchayat

Bhawan of the newly formed Gram Panchayat.

It has been averred in the present Public Interest Litigation

that although a more suitable land situated in the center of the

village was surrendered by certain villagers for the construction of

Panchayat Bhawan, the Sarpanch has, in his own interest, passed

a resolution for the allotment of the land comprising of Khasra

(2 of 4) [CW-9684/2020]

No.1572 which is a land recorded as "Gochar" in the revenue

records. It has further been averred that firstly, the gochar land

cannot be allotted for any other purpose and secondly, the same

being at a far distance from the center of the village would not be

convenient for the villagers.

A reply has been filed on behalf of the State and it has been

averred that the petitioner had surrendered the land on

16.06.2020 whereas the process for allotment of the land for

construction of Panchayat Bhawan had been set in motion on

13.02.2020 itself. Secondly, the process for setting apart of the

land in lieu of the gochar land has already been taken up by the

revenue authorities and an equal land comprising of Khasra

No.1801/1602 has been set apart for the gochar purposes. For

the same No Objection Certificate has also been issued by the

Gram Panchayat.

Vide an additional affidavit filed on behalf of the State it has

been brought on record that the construction of the Panchayat

Bhawan has already been completed and an amount of almost

Rs.35 Lacs has been spent for the same.

Counsel for the respondents relied upon the judgments

passed by Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition

No.7228/2021 (Ram Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &

Ors.) and D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13457/2021 (Samast

Gramvasi, Gram Panchayat, Deluon Ka Tala Vs. State of

Rajasthan & Ors.).

A bare perusal of the record makes it clear that the

construction of the Panchayat Bhawan has now been completed

and substantial amount has been spent on the same. It is also

clear on record that an equal land in lieu of the gochar land has

(3 of 4) [CW-9684/2020]

already been set apart by the revenue authorities. As held in

Samast Gramvasi's case (supra) by the Division Bench, it is the

sole discretion of the administration to decide the issues as to

where a government/public building is to be constructed. In

Samast Gramvasi's case, the Division Bench held as under:

"Where the Panchayat Bhawan should be constructed is primarily a relief to be considered by the administration dependent on the ground realities particularly when the Panchayat Bhawan is to cater the needs of the villagers. The disputes invariably arise as to which Gram Panchayat should have the onus of having the Panchayat Bhawan constructed on the land. However, these are the issues to be judged by the administration and not by the Court. Unless the decision of the authority i.e. the Collector is shown to be irrational, arbitrary or mala fide, the Court would not interfere."

Moresoever, it is clear from the reply filed on behalf of the

State that the present Panchayat Bhawan is situated on a location

which is connected by pakka/tarmac road on two sides and is

situated at equal distance that is 8 kilometers from the constituent

revenue village of the gram panchayat Saiyon ka Tala; whereas on

the contrary the land suggested by petitioner is situated 12

kilometers away from the constituent revenue village Durgoniyon

ka Tala, which is in contravention to the guidelines of the state

government wherein the distance from Gram Panchayat

headquarter to its constituent villages cannot be more than 8

kilometers.

In view of the ratio laid down in Samast Gramvasi's case

(supra) and in view of the fact that that the construction of the

Panchayat Bhawan has since been completed, this Court is not

inclined to interfere in the present PIL.

(4 of 4) [CW-9684/2020]

At this juncture, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner be permitted to move an application before the

competent authority for withdrawal of surrender of his land which

had been surrendered for construction of the Panchayat Bhawan.

Permission as sought for is granted and it is directed that if

the petitioner moves an appropriate application for withdrawal of

the surrender of his land, the same be dealt with by the

authorities in accordance with law.

With these observations, the present PIL is disposed of.

                                   (REKHA BORANA),J                                      (SANDEEP MEHTA),J


                                    61-T.Singh/-









Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)