JHALLA RAM Vs. GRAM SABHA KOSLI AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE street in dispute is a Mind alley situate in village Kosli. The Gram Panchayat of this village issued a notice under section 21 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952. (hereinafter called the Act) requiring the plaintiff to demolish the protection of his house which was alleged to be an encroachment on the public street. After considering the explanation of the plaintiff the Panchayat confirmed the notice and required him to remove the encroachment within the specified time. As that order was not complied with he was required to pay a fine of Rs. 25/ - and a further recurring fine of Re. 1/ - each day so long as the encroachment was not removed Both these orders were challenged in this suit on the ground that the street in dispute was not a public street and therefore, the action of the Gram Panchayat was wholly without jurisdiction. It was further pleaded that the recurring fine could not be imposed by the Gram Panchayat unless the trial was held in exercise of its criminal jurisdiction. The suit was contested by the Panchayat who reiterated that the street in dispute was a Public street and the orders passed were, therefore, within jurisdiction. Both the courts below have recorded a concurrent finding that the street in dispute was a public street and dismissed the suit. Still dissatisfied, the plaintiff has come up in this second appeal.

(2.) SO far as the imposition of the recurring fine is concerned, the matter stands concluded by a Division Bench decision in Naurang Lal v. Gram Panchayat of village Gujarwas and another, (1964) 66 P.L.R. 28, wherein it was held that it could not be imposed without a regular trial according to the procedure provided in the Act. Consequently the appeal to the extent of recurring fine has to be allowed.

(3.) IN view of the above finding this appeal is partially allowed and the order of the Panchayat imposing recurring fine is declared to be null and void. In all other respects, the decree of the lower Appellate Court is affirmed. In view of the partial success of the appeal the parties are left to bear their own costs.