UJJAGAR SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) Vs. DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 22.04.1994 (Annexure P -8) passed by respondent no.3 -Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Mahilpur.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are to the effect that in the year 1982, Sant Ram was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Maili. On 09.09.1982, auction of Khair trees belonging to the Gram Panchayat was held in which 4486 trees were auctioned @ Rs. 125.56 per square feet and the highest bid was given by M/s Shakti Katha Udyog Association which was accepted. An amount of Rs. 13,29,671/ - became payable by the said firm. The firm deposited Rs. 10,29,671/ - and Rs. 3 lacs remained due. Subsequently, fresh elections of Gram Panchayat were held in the year 1983 and Sant Ram was again elected as Sarpanch. On 04.01.1984, the Gram Panchayat passed a resolution that if the Contractor paid the balance amount of Rs. 3 lacs, permit be got issued from the Forest Department to cut the remaining trees. The Contractor claimed that 1632 trees of his earlier auction were yet to be cut and the Gram Panchayat admitted the said claim. On 06.01.1985, in the panchayat meeting held under the Chairmanship of Kabal Singh, recommendations were sent to the Forest Department to issue permit for 1632 trees to the contractor.

(3.) SANT Ram did not attend the meeting. The District Forest Officer renewed the earlier permit upto 31.03.1984 and the Contractor started working of Katha extraction in the forest but later on, the Block Development and Panchayat Officer -respondent no.3 stayed the cutting of trees as well as operation of the renewed permit. The contractor served a notice dated 06.08.1984 under Section 80 CPC upon the Collector, Hoshiarpur, District Forest Officer, Garhshankar and Block Development and Panchayat Ofdficer, Mahilpur against the said stoppage of the work and the matter remained under correspondence between the contractor and the concerned officers. In December, 1986, Sant Ram resigned as Sarpanch and the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Maili. The petitioner also received some notices from the contractor and the petitioner consulted the then Block Development and Panchayat Officer as well as the District Development and Panchayat Officer about the notices and he was advised that it would be better to avoid prolonged litigation, therefore, the matter was then referred to the Forest Department. The matter was sent to the Chief Conservator of Forests, who directed the department to intimate as to how many trees were due towards the lessee -firm. Ultimately, after consultation with the department, it was resolved that the Panchayat may write to the forest department by passing a resolution that actually 1632 trees were due to the lessee firm and the lessee -firm will pay the balance amount of Rs. 3 lacs for cutting of 1332 trees instead of 1632 trees, as claimed by it earlier. Accordingly, resolution dated 03.10.1990 (Annexure P -1/T) was passed and sent to the Forest Department through the Block Development and Panchayat Officer and District Development and Panchayat Officer, Hoshiarpur. Subsequently, on the basis of complaint made by Rattan Chand, Amrit Bhushan etc., respondent no.1 ordered an inquiry against the petitioner under Section 102 (1) of the Gram Panchayat Act, 1952, vide order dated 11.09.1991 (Annexure P - 2/T). The enquiry was entrusted to respondent no.2 -Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayats, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar. Seven charges were levelled against the petitioner to which he submitted reply. In the enquiry, none of the charges were found to be proved against the petitioner and vide letter dated 31.03.1992 (Annexure P -7/T), report was submitted to respondent no.1. The petitioner again received letter dated 29.05.1992 from respondent no.1 whereby the enquiry was transferred, vide letter dated 14.05.1992 (Annexure P -3/T), from respondent no.2 -Divisional Deputy Director Rural Development and Panchayats, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar to the Divisional Deputy Director Rural Development and Panchayats, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur. Thereafter, the petitioner sent letter dated 06.06.1992 (Annexure P -4) requesting respondent no.1 not to re -open the enquiry. The petitioner also submitted affidavit dated 12.06.1992 (Annexure P -5) to the effect that he had never submitted any application for transfer of the inquiry and he had never apprehended injustice from the previous enquiry officer. The petitioner had also got recorded his statement (Annexure P -6/T) to respondent no.4 -Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayats, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur. Later on, the petitioner came to know that Sh. B.K.Dhir, Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayats, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar had exonerated the petitioner of all the charges, vide report (Annexure P -7/T). However, respondent no.1 again directed respondent no.4 - Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayats, Ferozepur Division, Ferozepur to hold the enquiry afresh into the same charges. In the subsequent enquiry dated 11.12.1992, it was held that allegation nos.1, 3 and 6 stood proved against the petitioner. On the basis of enquiry report dated 11.12.1992, impugned notice/order dated 22.04.1994 (Annexure P -8/T) has been issued under Sections 102 and 105 of the Gram Panchayats Act, 1952 for recovery. Hence, this writ petition.