LexGRAM PANCHAYAT, VILLAGE KUM KALAN versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 692 A GRAM PANCHAYAT, VILLAGE KUM KALAN .i.. ' v. STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 4145 of 2001) B FEBRUARY 11, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.] + Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 ...... - Writ petition, challenging amendment made in 1961 Act - c Dismissed by High Court without considering the re/J'tJf- Held: Reasons introduce clarity in the judgment/order - Failure to consider relief in writ petition and absence of reasons render the order unsustainable - On facts, no reason indicated with reference to challenge to Amendment Act - Thus, matter D remitted to High Court - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Judgment/Order +. In view of the judgment of this Court in *Gram Panchayat of Village Jamal Pur vs. Ma/winder Singh and Ors, the High Court cancelled the allotment of Shamlat E deh land in favour of SD-displaced person. On 08.05.1995, the State of Punjab made an amendment in the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 and by virtue thereof, all transfers of land made prior to the judgment of this Court were held to be valid. The F appellant-Gram Panchayat filed writ petition for quashing )C the Notification dated 08.05.1995 and also for striking down the provisions of the Amendment Act No. 8 of 1995 being ultra vires of the Constitution of India and violative of the 1961 Act. High Court did not consider the relief G prayed for and dismissed the writ petition. Hence the present ap'peal. >--- .. Allowing the appeal and remitting the matter, the Court H 692 "';- -----i1 ~ GRAM PANCHAYAT, VILLAGE KUM KALAN v. STATE 693 OF PUNJAB & ORS. [P. SATHASIVAM, J.] ~ ~ HELD: The High Court did not consider the relief/ A challenge in the writ petition as to the validity or otherwise ·of the Amendment dated 8.5.1995 (Amendment Act No. 8 of 1995) in the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 made by the State of Punjab and the Notification thereon. The order of the High Court shows that B practically no reason was indicated with reference to the -4 challenge to the Amendment Act. The dismissal of the writ ., ' petition in such summary manner without adverting to their relief prayed for without indicating any reason is clearly indefensible. Reasons introduce clarity in an order and failure to consider the relief/challenge in the writ c petition and the absence of reasons render the High Court judgment unsustainable. Thus, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law by a reasoned D 4 order, particularly, with reference to challenge· made in the writ petition. [Para 11] [697-C, D, E, F] ·~ Gram Panchayat of Village Jamalpur vs. Ma/winder Singh and Ors. PLJ 1985 463 = 1985 (3) SCC 661 - referred to. E CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4145 of 2001 . .... ---if From the Judgment and Order dated 24.05.2000 of the ..,. ~ High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ F .... Petition No. 4816 of 1996 . S.D. Sharma and J.S. Wasu, Balbir Singh Gupta, Dinesh Verma, A.P. Mohanty, Rajeev Sharma, Ajay Pal and Rohit for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by G P. SATHASIVAM, J. 1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.05.2000 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in C.W.P. No. 4816of1996 in and by which the Division Bench dismissed the writ petition H 694 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 2 S.C.R. A filed by the appellant herein. 2) Gram Panchayat, Village Kum Kalan, Tehsil and Dist. Ludhiana through its Sarpanch, has filed the above appeal. According to the appellant, the mutation of the land in dispute which is Shamlat Deh measuring 242 kanals 11 marlas was B sanctioned in favour of the Gram Panchayat. Earlier the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1953 was amended by Punjab Act No. I of 1954 and definition of Sham lat Deh was given in Section 2(g) of the said Act and the provisions of the Amended Act were made applicable w.e.f. 09.01.1954 C retrospectively. In the Jamabandi, for the year 1965-66, Gram Panchayat has been described as the owner. Similarly, in the year 1970-71, Gram Panchayat was shown as the owner. 3) The dispute arose regarding the applicability of the D provisions of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 and the provisions of the Adm
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.