Civil Writ Petition No.13074 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 12.1.2011 Aasin son of Jabu and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Naridner Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondent Nos.1 to 5. Nemo for respondent No.6. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J. (Oral) The matrix of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that there is a Gram Panchayat known as Gram Panchayat, Shahpur Khurd, comprising of two villages, namely Shahpur Khurd and Kailgaon, situated at a distance of 3½ kilometers in Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad. The population of village Kailgaon is stated to be 1043, whereas that of village Shahpur Khurd is 738. On 27.10.2006, the Gram Panchayat has unanimously resolved and passed a resolution No.4 (Annexure P1) that Gram Panchayat of village Kailgaon be separated from Gram Panchayat of village Shahpur Khurd. The matter was again reiterated, vide resolutions (Annexures P2 to P6). 2. The petitioners claimed that in the meantime, BDPO (respondent No.5) has forwarded the case to Deputy Commissioner (respondent No.3) and Deputy Commissioner sent the same to Director, Development and Panchayat, Haryana (respondent No.2) for creating a separate Gram Panchayat, which is clear from the letter dated 3.12.2009 (Annexure P8). But no action has yet been taken in Civil Writ Petition No.13074 of 2010 2 this regard. According to the petitioners that respondent No.2, vide his letter dated 25.2.2010 (Annexure P9) sent the case back to respondent No.3 to forward the same again in the year 2014 on the basis of census of year 2011. 3. Instead of waiting that the case of establishing a separate Gram Panchayat is re-submitted to the Government as per the census of 2011, the petitioner did not feel satisfied and filed the instant writ petition challenging the impugned letter (Annexure P9) by invoking the provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable assistance and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant petition at this stage. 5. What is not disputed here is that the case of creation of separate Gram Panchayat has not yet been negatived by the State authorities. Respondent No.2 has only returned the case, vide Annexure P9 to Deputy Commissioner (respondent No.3) with the direction that it be again sent for creation of separate Panchayat on the basis of census of year 2011 and nothing (adverse) else has been decided by the respondents in this relevant direction. Therefore, to me, the present writ petition filed by the petitioner is premature at this stage, which is hereby dismissed as such. 6. Needless to mention that if the indicated case for establishment of separate Panchayat is not referred by the Deputy Commissioner (respondent No.3) to the State Government within one year, after the completion of census of 2011, then the petitioner would be at liberty to file a fresh petition in this context. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) 12.1.2011 Judge AS