Civil Writ Petition No.16158 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.16158 of 2010 Date of Decision:18.01.2011 Mukhtiar Singh, Panch Gram Panchayat, Kherabad, Block Verka, District Amritsar ......Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Surinder Kumar Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Sartaj Singh Gill, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Mr.B.S.Saini, Advocate, for Mr.Premjit Kalia, Advocate, for respondent No.5. **** M EHINDER S INGH S ULLAR , J.(oral) The matrix of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for a limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that in the wake of general panchayat elections, the petitioner was elected as a Panch of Gram Panchayat of village Kherabad, Block Verka, District Amritsar, in view of the provisions of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter to be referred as “the Act”). 2. In pursuance of the complaint(Annexure P-3), containing the allegations that the petitioner has constructed his house on the land measuring 10 marla, meant for drain of the Gram Panchayat, by taking illegal possession and, thus, he has misused his power, the Block Development & Panchayat Officer (respondent No.4) conducted the preliminary enquiry, found the petitioner guilty and sent his report to the District Development and Panchayat Officer(respondent Civil Writ Petition No.16158 of 2010 2 No.3), who referred the matter to the Director, Rural Development & Panchayat Department, Punjab(respondent No.2), vide report dated 15.07.2008(Annexure P-17). He issued a show cause notice(Annexure P-4) to the petitioner as to why appropriate action be not taken against him on the basis of enquiry report. The petitioner filed the reply(Annexure P-5) to the show cause notice. The regular enquiry was conducted by the Additional Deputy Commissioner. He found the petitioner guilty vide report dated 02.03.2010(Annexure P-8). 3. After the receipt of regular enquiry report(Annexure P-8) of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, respondent No.2 again issued second show cause notice(Annexure P-9) to the petitioner, to which he again filed the reply (Annexure P-10). After considering the material on record, respondent No.2 dismissed the petitioner from the post of Panch with immediate effect under Section 20(1) of the Act and debarred him to contest the elections for a period of five years, in terms of Section 20(2) of the Act vide impugned order dated 06.05.2010(Annexure P-2). 4. Aggrieved by the impugned order(Annexure P-2), the petitioner filed the appeal, which was dismissed as well by the appellate authority(respondent No.1) by virtue of impugned order dated 07.06.2010(Annexure P-1). 5. The petitioner still did not feel satisfied and filed the instant writ petition, challenging the impugned orders(Annexures P-1 and P-2), invoking the provisions of Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. That is how, I am seized of the matter. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable assistance and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant writ petition in this regard. 7. As is evident from the record that the petitioner was charged on the ground that he has constructed his house on the land measuring 10 marla, meant Civil Writ Petition No.16158 of 2010 3 for drain of Gram Panchayat, by taking its illegal possession and, thus, he has misused his power. Having completed all the codal formalities, ultimately, respondent No.2 issued show cause notice(Annexure P-9) to the petitioner, to which he filed reply(Annexure P-10), wherein he(petitioner) has categorically admitted that “as per revenue record, the Gram Panchayat is the owner of khasra No.56, measuring 15 kanal 5 marla and the cultivator is also Gram Panchayat. His house is constructed on this land, which is under the 'Lal Lakir'.” Consequently, the petitioner was found guilty of the charge alleged against him by respondent No.4-BDPO. 8. Not only that, the Additional Deputy Commissioner conducted the regular enquiry in a prudent manner and recorded the statements of the concerned parties. During the course of enquiry, the petitioner has also admitted that the land in question is shamlat land of the Panchayat. 9. Taking into consideration the entire material on record and the admission of the petitioner, the Additional Deputy Commissioner vide his report (Annexure P-8) concluded that the charges alleged against the petitioner were duly proved. Taking cognizance, respondent No.2 after following the due procedure, accepted the report(Annexure P-8), dismissed the petitioner from the post of Panch with immediate effect, vide impugned order dated 06.05.2010(Annexure P-2). The operative part of which is, as under:- “As per the regular enquiry report received from the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Development) Amritsar, the Panchayat Secretary stated in his statement that as per revenue record the khasra number 56 which is in the ownership of Gram Panchayat and the Gram Panchayat had been in continuous possession upon whole of the said land, but at the spot on the area of pond, many people are looking to be in possession. As per the report of the Tehsildar, Amritsar, along with report of District Development and Panchayat Officer, as per report dated 14.7.2008 , Sh.Mukhtiar Singh, Panch, son of Harbans Singh is in illegal possession by constructing a house on 10 marla of land of pond. Therefore, an allegation of illegal possession leveled against him is fully proved.” Civil Writ Petition No.16158 of 2010 4 10. The matter was again re-examined by the appellate authority (respondent No.1) and it upheld the order(Annexure P-2) of respondent No.2, vide impugned order dated 07.06.2010(Annexure P-1). 11. Meaning thereby, respondent Nos.1 and 2 have recorded the findings of fact based on the cogent evidence brought on record by the parties and the admission that the petitioner has illegally encroached upon the land of the Gram Panchayat, by misusing his official power of Panch and he is not entitled to be retained on the said post of Panch. Such concurrent findings of fact based on the evidence cannot possibly be interfered with, in exercise of limited jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, unless the same are perverse or without jurisdiction. No such patent illegality or legal infirmity has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the impugned orders. Therefore, the same deserve to be maintained in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 12. No other legal point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the learned counsel for the parties. 13. In the light of aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed as such. January 18, 2011 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) seema JUDGE