KULDEEP SINGH NIHANG Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioners allegedly in Public Interest against the order dated 03.03.2017 (Annexure P-7) by which the Financial Commissioner, Punjab, has permitted transfer of land on the basis of resolution dated 16.11.2016 of Gram Sabha, Phagganmajra, District Patiala. It is alleged that 106 kanals 15 marlas of land belonging to respondent No.9 has been exchanged with 89 kanals 18 marlas land of the Panchayat.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that respondent No.9 acquired the land by paying an exorbitant price of Rs.61 lacs per acre and thereafter got the same exchanged with panchayat land valued at Rs.2-2.5 crores per acre, causing loss to the Panchayat. It is submitted that the concerned revenue officer, i.e. Tehsildar, submitted an incorrect evaluation report on the basis of which the matter was processed and ultimately the final orders have been passed transferring the land, causing loss to the gram panchayat and illegal benefit to respondent No.9. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the aforesaid loss of revenue to the panchayat has given rise to this Public Interest Litigation in which appropriate directions are sought to be issued and action be taken against the erring persons.

(3.) Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, submits that the proposal to exchange the land of respondent No.9 with that of panchayat was moved through the panchayat on the basis of a resolution passed on 16.11.2016, whereafter the matter was verified by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer and the District Development Panchayat Officer, who assessed the comparative value of the land and submitted the reports before the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala. It is submitted that the Deputy Commissioner thereafter forwarded the matter to respondent No.2-Financial Commissioner, Urban Development and Panchayat Department, who verified the reports and thereafter passed necessary orders of exchange under Rule 5 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules 1964, after obtaining sanction from the Governor of Punjab. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab further submits that the entire case was dealt with in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law and the decision has been taken by the authorities after due verification and examining the reports submitted by the concerned revenue authorities. It is submitted that the land in question has been permitted to be exchanged in accordance with the provisions of Rule 5 of 1964 and while doing so, the authorities have also taken into consideration the fact that the land was exchanged for public welfare works like providing free schooling and hostels for special children, free computer coaching center, free tailoring and embroidery center, free beautician courses and free charitable multi-speciality hospital, which would provide free treatment of every disease and dialysis units on cheaper rate along with free eye operation etc. It is submitted that apart from the aforesaid, the authorities, while permitting exchange, has also imposed strict conditions of providing 25% reservation in the employment to the residents of the village and benefit of treatment, education and training on the basis of first come first basis. It is submitted that there is a strict stipulation contained in the order permitting transfer that respondent No.9-Trust will use the land only for the purpose for which it has been given to it in exchange.