BAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the Panchayat elections held in 1974, petitioner Baj Singh was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Chottian Kalan, Tehsil Moga, District Faridkot. Prior to the election of the petitioner as the Sarpanch, there were satna other persons who were elected as the Sarpanches.

(2.) A complaint was made against the petitioner that he had illegally grabed the land of the Gram Panchayat by getting sale deeds in favour of his close relatives. Even the mutations had been sanctioned in favour of the purchasers. This was reported by the District Development and Panchayats Officer, Faridkot on 3rd September, 1987. On these allegations it was alleged that the petitioner had misused his office as Sarpanch. A regular enquiry against the petitioner was ordered under Section 102 (1) of the Punjab Gram Panchayats Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). A regular enquiry was conducted by the Naib Tahsildar. According! to the Naib Tahsildar, the following charges stood proved against the petitioner :

(3.) DURING the course of personal hearing before the joint Director, Panchayats (exercising the powers of the Director of Panchayats) the petitioner had submitted that he had not distributed the Panchayat land amongst him or his relatives. The Execution and registration of deeds had been done in the Registrar's office by the owners of the land. It was objected to by him but after he failed, he stopped the purchasers to enter upon the land. His co-villagers took the case to the Judicial Court, where he contested, but since there was no entry in favour of the Panchayat in the revenue record, the case was decided against the Panchayat. He had filed an appeal against the said order in the Court of District Judge. As there was no ownership of Panchayat recorded in the revenue record, the appeal went against the Panchayat. It was further stated that during the consolidation some land had been reserved for common purposes, which had been got pro rata from the landowners. After the use of the land for common purposes some area was left which was shown in the revenue record as 'mushtarka Malkan' in the column of ownership. On account of this entry in the revenue record, the co-villagers started selling and purchasing their shares and when this was being done, he had informed the Block Development and Panchayat Officer. About the interpolation of record, he had stated that the mutations were entered in the year 1968 and neither he was Sarpanch during that period nor a Panch. This record was not in his possession. The pleas of the petitioner were rejected and he was ordered to be removed from the office of the Sarpanch vide order of the Joint Director, Panchayats, dated 2nd February, 1989 (Annexure P. 10 ). The appeal of the petitioner against the order of removal was also dismissed by the Joint Secretary to Government, Punjab, Rural Development and Panchayats Department, vide order dated 17th October, 1989 (Annexure P. 11 ). The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner impugning the orders, Annexures P. 10 and P. 11.