SANT RAM Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 for seeking issuance of writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents No.1 to 4 to take action against respondents No.5 and 6 for conducting auction of 9736 trees standing in the shamlat land of the Gram Panchayat by alleging that the auction had been carried out at a very low/meager price in favour of respondent No.7- Surinder Kumar, Contractor. A further prayer is made for quashing of the auction held on 18/12/2000.

(2.) Briefly summarized, the facts of the present case are that petitioners who are Panches and inhabitants of village Nurpur Khurd in Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Ropar have approached this Court against the auction of standing trees/timber over 900 acres of land owned by the Gram Panchayat that was finalized in favour of respondent No.7. It is averred that the Gram Panchayat Nurpur Khurd and Gram Panchayat Jatpur had earlier conducted auction proceedings on 22/1/1994 for a total of 1350 trees in accordance with the Forest Rules. The highest bid of Rs.46,62,500.00 had been received from respondent No.7 in the above open auction. The respondent No.7, however, did not fulfill the conditions or make the deposit and hence did not cut the said trees. The Gram Panchayats of Jatpur and Nurpur Khurd thus notified fresh auction to be conducted on 30/11/2000 for 9736 trees including the above 1350 trees that were subject matter of auction held on 22/1/1994. In the above fresh auction proceedings, respondent No.7 again submitted the highest bid but of Rs.51,09,000.00 only.

(3.) It was alleged that once the 1350 trees had been earlier put to auction and fetched a bid of Rs.46,62,000.00 approximately, the bid for 9736 trees (including the said 1350 trees) for a meager amount of Rs.51,09,000.00was all stage managed and was an attempt to allow the respondent No.7 to remove much more trees for a meager price and to enable him to draw windfall gains. The challenge to the auction proceedings was also made on the ground that the valuation of the trees was not got done by the respondents No.5 and 6 from the Forest Department as required under the applicable rules and further that the trees have been grossly undervalued for giving premium to the respondent No.7. It was also alleged that the auction proceedings were not properly publicized and interested members from general public could not participate in the auction proceedings and as a result thereof, the optimum valuation of the timber could not be obtained. The same has thus deprived the Gram Panchayat of the revenue which it could have earned.