SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT Vs. BLOCK SAMITI MACHHIWARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sections 21 and 35 of the Punjab Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act, 1961, in so far as they are relevant for the purposes of this appeal are as follows :-

(2.) Now, on 17th September, 1971, purporting to exercise the powers conferred by Section 35(3), the Government, by order, laid down the extent of administrative control exercisable by various authorities over the officials whose services were placed at the disposal of Panchayat Samitis by various departments of the Government under Section 35(1). Entries 50, 51, 52 and 54 of the Order prescribe the Deputy Commissioner as the authority competent to : (a) restrict the duration and frequency of tour, (b) to permit exchange of daily allowance for mileage allowance during the whole period of tour, (c) to disallow P.F.R. allowance for a journey to attend an obligatory examination etc., and (d) to countersign T.A. Bills, in regard to Block Development and Panchayat Officers. The Government also issued letter No. 1826-SBH-III-71/5647, directing that henceforth the second confidential reports on the work and conduct of Block Development and Panchayat Officers should be written by Sub-Divisional Officers after the same had been initiated by the Chairman, Panchayat Samitis and thereafter forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner. By letter No. 22343-EI-CD-72/5851, a time table was also fixed for the writing of the confidential reports.

(3.) Alleging that these orders and instructions of the Government encroached upon the administrative control vested in the Panchayat Samitis, the Panchayat Samiti, Machhiwara, filed C.W.P. No. 3970 of 1972 for the issue of an appropriate writ to protect its statutory right. A learned Single Judge of this court accepted the writ petition and quashed items 50, 51, 52 and 54 of the Order dated 17th September, 1971, as also the instructions contained in the other two letters relating to the Executive Officers. The Secretary to Government, Punjab, Development Department and others have preferred this appeal.