CWP No. 2467 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No. 2467 of 2011 Date of decision August 4, 2011 Smt. Phool Kaur ....... Petitioner Versus Permanent Lok Adalat, Gurgaon, Haryana and others ........Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Ms. Amita Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Indu Bala, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Mr. R. A. Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.4. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?Yes K. Kannan, J (oral). CM No.10296 of 2011 C.M, is allowed. Written statement on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 is taken on record. CWP No. 2467 of 2011 1. The writ petition is to annul the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Gurgaon declaring one Bijender Singh Thakran as an owner of the property with consequential relief of permanent injunction. The plaintiff before the Permanent Lok Adalat appears to have died and the legal representatives have been impleaded as respondent CWP No. 2467 of 2011 2 Nos. 2 to 5. 2. The only contention by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Lok Adalat had no jurisdiction to pass the decree in the manner referred to in the impugned order. I uphold the objection of the petitioner for the reason that the jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adlaat is confined to cases which are referred to under Section 22-B that establishes as follows_:- 22B. Establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 19, the Central Authority or, as the case may be, every State Authority shall, by notification, establish Permanent Lok Adalats at such places and for exercising such jurisdiction in respect of one or more public utility services and for such areas as may be specified in the notification(underlining mine). (2) Every Permanent Lok Adalat established for an area notified under sub-section (1) shall consist of -- (a) a person who is, or has been, a district judge or additional district judge or has held judicial office higher in rank than that of a district judge, shall be the Chairman of the Permanent Lok Adalat; and (b) two other persons having adequate experience in public utility service to be nominated by the Central Government or, as the case may be, the State Government on the recommendation of the Central Authority or,as the case may be, the State Authority,appointed by the Central Authority or, as the case may be, the State Authority, establishing such Permanent Lok Adalat and the other terms and conditions of the The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 appointment of the Chairman and other persons referred to in clause (b) shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government. CWP No. 2467 of 2011 3 3. That section clearly lays down that establishment of the Permanent Lok Adalat shall be for exercising jurisdiction in respect of one or more public services and such areas as may be specified in the notification. The latter part relates to the territorial jurisdiction while the first part refers to subject matter that would invest the Lok Adalat, with the requisite jurisdiction. The Public Utility Services in respect of which the Lok Adalat will have jurisdiction as defined under Section 22-A (b) as follows:- “22A. Definitions - In this Chapter and for the purpose of sections 22 and 23, unless the context otherwise requires;- (a) “Permanent Lok Adalat” means a Permanent Lok Adalat established under sub-section (1) of section 22B; (b) “public utility service” means any- (i) transport service for the carriage of passengers or goods by air, road or water; or (ii) postal, telegraph or telephone service; or (iii) supply of power, light or water to the public by any establishment; or (iv) system of public conservancy or sanitation; or (v) service in hospital or dispensary; or (vi) insurance service. and includes any service which the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, may, in the public interest, by notification, declare to be a public utility service for the purposes of this chapter.” 4. Section 22-C which refers to cognizance of cases to Permanent Lok Adalat sets out that a party to a dispute may make an application to Permanent Lok Adalat for settlement of a dispute. This Section contains some exceptions which specifically enumerate certain classes of cases which shall not be taken up by the Permanent Lok Adalat. Section 22-D provides a procedure for Permanent Lok Adalat that includes a jurisdiction to conduct conciliation and Section 22-E provides for an CWP No. 2467 of 2011 4 award for Permanent Lok Adalat to be final. The fulcrum on which the entire missionary can revolve would be Section 22 (b) and (c)and that literally exhaust all types of cases that the Lok Adalat could dealt with. 5. A declaration and injunction in relation to immovable property is neither a relief that a Permanent Lok Adalat can grant nor the subject matter that it can entertain. The award passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat is nonest and outside its jurisdiction and it is accordingly quashed. It is stated that the petitioner has already a suit to set aside the award and the same is pending. Since the matter relates to an issue of jurisdiction and competence of a Public Authority, I would hold that the Civil Court will dispose of the said suit in the line of what had been decided through this writ petition. 6. The writ petition is allowed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 4, 2011 archana