GRAM PANCHAYAT KEHARPURA Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT KOHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendant's second appeal against whom the suit for declaration was dismissed by the trial Court but was decreed in appeal.

(2.) Two villages named Kohar and Keharpura have separate revenue estates but it appears that they are situate quite close to one another. Previously they had a common Gram Panchayat but in the year 1973 there came into existence two separate Gram Panchayats for these two villages. On 6th January, 1976 the Deputy Director Panchayats ordered that the land measuring 249 Kanals 1 Marla previously belonging to Gram Panchayat Kohar may be given to Gram Panchayat Keharpura. The Revenue Authorities subsequently passed various orders to implement this order. The Gram Panchayat Kohar has challenged the order dated 6th January, 1976 passed by the Deputy Director Panchayats. It has been alleged that the Deputy Director had no authority to take an area belonging to Gram Panchayat Kohar and give it to the Gram Panchayat Keharpura. The plaintiff, therefore, sought a declaration that the said order and the one dated 26th June, 1976 passed by the Collector Bhiwani are illegal, void, without jurisdiction and not binding on it. The suit was contested on the ground that the order was legal and valid. According to the defendant, the Director Panchayats was competent to take away the land from the plaintiff Gram Panchayat and give it to the defendant Gram Panchayat taking into consideration the interest of the public at large. The trial Court found that the order of the Director Panchayats could not be said to be illegal, null and void. Consequently, the suit was dismissed. In appeal, the learned District Judge reversed the said finding and came to the conclusion that the order of the Director Gram Panchayats was illegal and without jurisdiction. It was observed that no notification as contemplated under section 4(2) of the Gram Panchayat Act was issued and, therefore, the said order was illegal and not binding on the plaintiff. Consequently, the suit was decreed. Dissatisfied with the same, the defendant-Panchayat has filed this second appeal in this Court.

(3.) The only argument raised on behalf of the appellant is that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the present suit. Reference was made to section 13 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act.