C.W.P. No.8120 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.8120 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 19, 2008 Sukhwant Singh and others .....PETITIONERS Versus State of Punjab and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH --- Present: Mr.H.S.Sirohi, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.N.D.S.Mann, Addl.A.G.,Punjab, for the respondents. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioners, who are residents of village Dialpura and belong to Scheduled Caste community, have filed this petition for setting aside the order dated 28.4.2008 (endorsed on 9.5.2008) passed by respondent No.1, whereby the representation filed by the petitioners to reserve two seats of Panches in Gram Panchayat of Village Dialpura for Scheduled Caste category, has been rejected. A prayer has also been made for quashing the Census Report of year 2001 regarding Village Dialpura. In this case, the Gram Panchayat of Village Dialpura constitutes five members. As per Section 11 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), the reservation for the offices of Panches for Scheduled Castes is to be made on the basis of ratio C.W.P. No.8120 of 2008 -2- of population of the Scheduled Castes in the village as shown in the last Census Report. According to the Census Report 2001, the total population of Village Dialpura has been recorded as 974, out of which, the population of Scheduled Castes has been shown as 37. Thus, according to the population figure given in Census Report 2001, out of total five seats, no seat was reserved for the members of the Scheduled Castes category as the ratio of Scheduled Castes population in the village came to only 1.26. Earlier, the petitioners had filed CWP No.6253 of 2008 for directing the respondents to reserve two seats for Scheduled Castes as according to the petitioners the Scheduled Castes population in the village was more than 400 at the time of Census Report 2001. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 11.4.2008 with a direction to the State to consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, vide order dated 28.4.2008, the representation filed by the petitioners was considered by the Government and the same was rejected. It has been stated that as per the definition of Section 2(zn) of the Act, the term “population” means the rural population as ascertained at the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published. Further as per Section 11 of the Act, reservation for the offices of Panches, belonging to Scheduled Castes, is to be made keeping in view the ratio of the population of the Scheduled Castes vis-a-vis the total population in the village. Since, as per the Census Report 2001, the population of the Scheduled Castes in the village has been recorded as 37 out of total population of 974, the ratio of which comes only 1.26, therefore, no seat could be reserved for a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste category. We have heard the counsel for the parties. C.W.P. No.8120 of 2008 -3- Counsel for the petitioners could not controvert the figure of population recorded in the Census Report 2001. His contention is that in the Census Report itself, a wrong figure was recorded regarding Scheduled Castes population. In support of his contention, except the oral averments made in the petition, the petitioners have not annexed any document or any authentic report to show that in the year 2001, the Scheduled Castes population in the village was more than 400. In absence of any authentic material and at this belated stage, we cannot go into the validity of the population figure recorded in Census Report of 2001. Therefore, keeping in view the figure of Scheduled Castes population and total population of the village as given in the Census Report 2001, no illegality was committed by the respondents while giving no reservation to the Scheduled Caste category for members of the Gram Panchayat. Thus, we do not find any ground to set aside the impugned order. Dismissed. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE November 19, 2008 ( JASWANT SINGH ) vkg JUDGE