ROHLU RAM Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Nobody appears on behalf of the Panchayat. In this case on a complaint being made to the Panchayat a notice was issued to the petitioner to remove the obstruction within the time fixed in the notice or, if he chose so to do, to appear before the Panchayat at the time fixed to move the Panchayat to have the order set aside and modified. In response to this notice he appeared before the Panchayat and showed cause but the Panchayat did not accept his contention and came to the conclusion that there was an obstruction in the public street and imposed a fine of Rs. 20/- and also a recurring fine of Re. 1/- till the obstruction was removed.

(2.) The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner before me is that Section 21 of the Gram Panchayat Act contemplates two stages. First, an ex parte notice directing the person concerned to remove the alleged encroachment or to show cause against the order. If the person concerned removes the encroachment nothing more is to be done. On the other hand, if he disputes the fact that there is an encroachment and he appears before the Panchayat then he has complied with this notice. The second stage arises when the Panchayat does not agree with him, in which case it can make the order absolute. Now sub-section (2) of Section 21 provides that if such an act is not performed within the time fixed, the Gram Panchayat may cause it to be performed and may recover the cost of performing it from such person. Sub-section (1) read with sub-section (2) shows that after an order is made absolute by the Panchayat, the Panchayat has to give a direction for performance of the act in this case, removal of the obstruction within the time that may be fixed by the Panchayat and it is only after the person concerned has not performed that act within the time so fixed, that the Gram Panchayat can cause it to be performed itself.

(3.) By virtue of Section 23, in addition to the authority vested in the Panchayat to cause an act to be performed, it can impose penalty on the person concerned for disobeying this order which had been made absolute, after hearing the parties. The contention is that this stage never arose and while making the order absolute the Panchayat also imposed a fine which it had no jurisdiction to do. I feel there is force in this argument and the wording of Section 21 makes it quite clear. Same view was taken by Gurdev Singh, J. in Criminal Revision No. 1427 of 1961.