CWP No. 8979 of 2010 1 ******** IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 8979 of 2010 Date of Decision : 08.07.2010 Gram Panchayat Village Kangar, Block Bhagta Bhai Ka, District Bathinda .......... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab & others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present : Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikrant Oberoi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.S. Virk, Addl. A.G., Punjab for respondents No. 1, 2, 4, 6 & 7. Mr. J.S. Puri,Advocate for respondent No.8 **** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) Affidavit on behalf of respondent No.8 filed in Court today, taken on record. The Gram Panchayat Village Kangar, Block Bhagta Bhai Ka, District Bathinda invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the order dated 17.3.2010 (Annexure P-2/T), passed by respondent No.6 Executive Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Bhagta Bhai Ka, District Bathinda,directing the petitioner to spend the grant disbursed to the Gram Panchayat from Rural Development Fund for constructing the pavements and drains from house of one Darshan CWP No. 8979 of 2010 2 ******** Singh s/o Tara Singh to outer road and from Abadi near Petrol Pump to the house of Jagtar Singh son of Sandhura Singh, as also the order dated 29.3.2010 (Annexure P-3/T) passed by respondent No.7 Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Bhagta Bhai Ka, District Bathinda, directing the petitioner to spend the amount of RDF grant for construction of streets and drains. The impugned orders have been challenged by the petitioner Panchayat on the ground that the grant sanctioned to the Panchayat had to be spent by the Panchayat as per the necessity., and the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Bhagta Bhai Ka, District Bathinda and the Executive Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Bhagta Bhai Ka, District Bathinda had no jurisdiction to interfere in spending of the grant, nor they have any jurisdiction to issue any direction. It is also the case of the petitioner that the directions were being issued at the instance of respondent No.8 i.e. Sikandar Singh Maluka, Ex Minister, Punjab. The writ petition is contested. Sikandar Singh Maluka, Ex Minister, Punjab has denied the allegations of mala fide by way of affidavit filed in Court today. The State contested the case, on the ground, that the grant under RDF (Rural Development Fund) is granted to the Panchayat, on the request made by the Panchayat for a specified work, and not for use of Panchayat as per its wish. It is the case of the respondent / State that the Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution Annexure R-3/T seeking grant CWP No. 8979 of 2010 3 ******** under the RDF, the resolution read as under :- “Today on 12-11.2008 the meeting of Gram Sabha Kangar took place under the chairmanship of Sadhu Singh Sarpanch (Sabha Patti) at 10 AM in Talwandi Agwar Dharamshala and this meeting took place in consonance with the meeting dated 23-10-08. The following proceeding took place. Resolution No.2 The resolution presented and passed that the works to be done in the village, list whereof is prepared, which is as under:- Sr. No. Name of work Length X breadth approx. Xx XX Xx 9 From outer Phirni upto the street of house of Darshan 225' x15' Singh son of Tara Singh Drain 225' x15' 10 From Salabatpura-Baja khana Road upto the house of Jagtar Singh son of Sandhura Singh Brick paving 700'x11' Xx Xx xx Resolution regarding the above works passed a copy is sent to the higher authorities with the request to sanction grant for the above said works. The resolution is passed. The signatures/ thumb impressions of the present members of Gram Sabha are on the register.” The contention of the learned State counsel was, that the CWP No. 8979 of 2010 4 ******** respondents had only asked the petitioner to spend the amount as per the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat. The orders passed by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Bhagta Bhai Ka, District Bathinda and the Executive Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Bhagta Bhai Ka, Districit Bathinda are being misread by the petitioner, without any reason whatsoever. It is thus prayed that the writ petition filed by the petitioner be dismissed. It is not in dispute that the grant has to be spent, for the purpose for which sanctioned, on the request of the Gram Panchayat. There is no dispute between the parties that the grant given to the Gram Panchayat is to be spent strictly as per the resolution Annexure R-3/T passed by the Gram Panchayat. The respondents have no objection to spending of grant as per the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat, but only direction given was, that this money be spent expeditiously, so that development work does not suffer. The petitioner can have no objection to this direction of the official respondents. In view of the stand taken by the parties, this writ petition is disposed off, with a direction that development work be carried out and grants be spent strictly as per the resolution Annexure R-3/T, reproduced above. The grants be also spent expeditiously so that development work is completed well within time. Writ disposed off. CWP No. 8979 of 2010 5 ******** 08.07.2010 (VINOD K. SHARMA) 'sp' JUDGE