FAQIR CHAND Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court praying for setting aside the order dated 28.03.2018 passed by the District Development and Panchayat Officer-cum-Collector, Jalandhar, Annexure P-6.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a land-less labourer belonging to weaker section of society and is more than 70 years of age. He being a land-less labourer and a person belonging to weaker section of society, was allotted a plot measuring 2 Marlas 7 Sarsai to enable him to construct his house thereon. He is living in the same for the last about 30 years. He does not have even electric connection, however, water supply is there. To his surprise, he came to know that on March 29, 2016, an ex parte eviction order has been passed against him by the DDPO, Jalandhar on a petition filed by the Gram Panchayat under Section 7 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner filed an application for setting aside of ex parte order but the same was kept pending. Compelled under the circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP-28755-2017, which was disposed of on 18.12.2017 directing the DDPO, Jalandhar to decide the application for setting aside of ex parte order by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order. Thereafter, the DDPO, Jalandhar though accepted the application filed by the petitioner for setting aside the ex parte order on 28.03.2018 but on the same day by same order restored the earlier order of eviction passed by him. Both the orders are cryptic, non-speaking, hence deserve to be set aside. Interference by this Court is called for as there is complete violation of principle of natural justice.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the only grievance of the petitioner when he approached this Court earlier was that before passing the order of eviction, he was not heard by the DDPO. After the direction was issued by this Court, due opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner by the DDPO and thereafter finding no merits in the case set up by the petitioner, the application filed by the Gram Panchayat for eviction of the petitioner was accepted after recalling the ex parte order. The petitioner has effective alternative remedy of appeal against the aforesaid order. Hence, the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed to enable the petitioner to avail of his alternative remedy of appeal.