IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17874 of 2010 Date of decision: 21st December, 2010 Makhan Singh and another … Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Avtar Singh Khinda, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Additional AG, Punjab for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present writ petition has been filed praying that a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued and the order dated 18th February, 2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by respondent No.2-Director, Rural Development and Panchayat Department, Punjab, whereby the petitioners were removed from the office of Panch, be quashed. A perusal of the impugned order (Annexure P-2) reveals that respondent No.2 held in categoric terms that petitioner No.1-Makhan Singh, Panch is in illegal occupation of 15 marlas of land in Khasra No.59 and is also occupying abadi deh within the Phirni (circular road of the village). The impugned order further states that petitioner No.2-Puran Singh, Panch has constructed a room for tethering his cattle on 10 marlas of land in Khasra No.59. The impugned order (Annexure P-2) passed by respondent No.2 was affirmed by the appellate authority on 22nd March, 2010 vide its order (Annexure P-5) in an appeal filed by petitioner No.1- Makhan Singh. Similarly, qua petitioner No.2-Puran Singh also, the Civil Writ Petition No.17874 of 2010 impugned order was affirmed by the appellate authority vide its order (Annexure P-6) dated 22nd March, 2010. Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the order (Annexure P-2) whereby the petitioners were removed from the office of Panch and the orders (Annexure P-5 and P-6) passed by the appellate authority are liable to be set aside, as they are passed on the basis of a report of demarcation carried in absence of the petitioners. Learned counsel has further stated that the petitioners were not associated when the demarcation proceedings were carried-out. Counsel for the petitioners has contended in emphatic terms that in case a fresh demarcation is carried-out, at the cost of the petitioners, by the revenue officials, it will be apparent that the petitioners are not in unauthorized occupation of the Panchayat land. Counsel for the State has submitted that it is a fact that the demarcation was not carried in presence of the petitioners, but he has explained that when the demarcation proceedings were to be carried-out, the petitioners were called through the Chowkidar of the village. It is not discernible as to whether a prior notice was issued to the petitioners to remain present at the time when demarcation proceedings were to be carried-out or at the relevant moment only the Chowkidar of the village was sent to call the petitioners. It is quite possible that at that time, the petitioners were not in the village. Therefore, a prior notice ought to have been served upon them to remain present at the time when demarcation proceedings were to be carried out. Taking this fact into consideration, the impugned order (Annexure P-2), along with the orders (Annexure P-5 and P-6) passed by the appellate authority, is hereby set aside and on the request of counsel for the petitioners, it is ordered that a fresh demarcation shall be carried out by the revenue officials of the State on an appointed day. Rs.10,000/- 2 Civil Writ Petition No.17874 of 2010 is assessed as the cost for carrying out a fresh demarcation and the same shall be borne by the petitioners. The petitioners shall deposit the cost of Rs.10,000/- in the office of Additional Deputy Commissioner (Development), Ferozepur, within ten days from today, who shall depute the concerned revenue officials not lower than the rank of Tehsildar to carry out demarcation to determine as to whether the petitioners are in an unauthorized occupation of the Panchayat land or not. The Additional Deputy Commissioner-respondent No.3 shall fix a date, on which the demarcation is to be carried out and a prior notice thereof shall be given to the petitioners as well as to the concerned officials of the Department of Rural Development and Panchayat, Punjab. With the observations made above, present writ petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE December 21, 2010 rps 3