RAJBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of Civil Writ Petitions No. 9180, 252, 1156, 2945, 1455, 1596, 1733, 1818, 1876, 1912, 2164, 2308, 2349, 2366, 2422, 2454, 2643, 2656, 2677, 2791, 2885, 2895, 2983, 3233, 3234, 3283, 3635, 3672, 3726, 3729, 3743, 3796, 3879, 3892, 4079, 4161, 4210, 4253, 4317, 4429, 4530, 4547, 4654, 4681, 694, 918, 2360, 920, 3022, 3105, 3333, 3306, 3419, 2939, 898, 2645, 2463, 3634, 5121, 6407, 6146, 6071, 5253, 5448, 6447, 5398, 5227, 6940, 5542, 6007, 5165, 6543, 6711, 4509, 6621, 6538, 5039, 5013, 5939, 5399, 3414, 4927, 6084, 5071, 3631, 4148, 2533, 322, 3176, 4401, 5641, 7325, 425, 4274, 324, 7367, 9049, 839, 9290, 9376, 9252, 9185, 9178, 9335, 9805, 5553, 7237, 9809, 781, 1158, 1538, 9086, 9146, 9176, 9194, 9207, 9225, 9253, 9347, 9364, 9401, 10057, 10110, 10150, 10187, 10287, 10288, 10309, 10396, 10420, 10423, 10435, 10569, 10682, 10752, 10758, 10759, 10778, 10788, 10800, 10808, 10942, 10974, 10985, 11002, 11051, 11096, 11134, 11142, 11197, 11222, 11230, 11258, 11271, 11309, 11319, 11334, 11376, 11447, 11488, 11491, 11498, 11527, 11529, 11546, 11555, 11575, 11591, 11751, 11841, 11848, 11860, 11898, 11901, 11903, 11908, 11916, 11921, 11998, 12073, 12123, 12154, 12164, 12168, 12186, 12288, 12301, 12308, 6999, 5463, 12332, 12396, 12448, 12453, 12464, 12465, 12540, 12543, 12742, 12754, 12765, 12777, 12780, 12813, 12823, 12842, 562, 7075, 7683, 7435, 8104, 8224, 8230, 8552, 8657, 8672, 8960, 8969, 9018, 9041, 9481, 8409, 12957, 12973, 13204, 13209, 13213, 1884, 13361, 13568, 13791, 13885, 14098, 15242, 15379, 14775 and 15483, 15579, all of the year 2009, and CWP No. 18248 of 2008, as common question of law and facts is involved in all these cases. For convenience of dictating order, facts are being mentioned from Civil Writ Petition No. 9180 of 2009.

(2.) IN all these writ petitions, scheme, framed by the State of Haryana on February 1, 2008 (in short the Scheme), for allotment of 100 Sq. yards residential plots, to the families of the Scheduled caste and to the families living below poverty line is under challenge. Taking note of above said fact, vide order dated August 4, 2009, it was ordered that it is not necessary to file detailed reply in all these cases because issue involved was the same, i.e., validity or otherwise of the above Scheme. It was further ordered that if counsel for the petitioners in any of the writ petitions wish to get copy of the written-statement filed in this case or in CWP No. 6447 of 2009, he may approach the Advocate General, Haryana, who was directed to supply copy of the written-statement(s) forthwith.

(3.) IT was stated by the petitioner that he is a resident of village Parbnawa in district Kaithal. Being proprietor, he has interest in the common land of the village, which was left out during consolidation proceedings, after imposing a pro-rata cut on the land owners in the village. It was further asserted that only the Gram Panchayat has the power to transfer/gift the land as per provisions of the Act and the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964 (in short the Rules). The Gram Panchayat cannot be forced to allot plot to any resident of the village, as has been done by directing it, to implement the Scheme. It was further stated that the Gram Panchayat is a statutory body and is elected for welfare of the village and is constituted to carry out numerous development activities in the village. Gram Panchayat is custodian of the public property and it cannot be forced to part with its property for a particular Section of the village population. In the village common land, which was kept separate by imposing a cut on the land owners during consolidation proceedings, the proprietors are the owners and the property cannot be taken away without payment of the compensation. It was further stated that in his village, Kanals 8 Marlas of land was reserved for common purposes during the consolidation proceedings. The above said land is being utilised for many common purposes like School, Cremation Ground, Dispensary etc. Out of the remaining land, the Gram Panchayat is deriving income, by auctioning the same and the money so earned is being spent on development works in the village. It was further asserted that the Gram Panchayat has right only to manage the common purpose land. As per provisions of East Punjab Holding (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, the ownership shall continue to vest in the land owners. The Government has made an attempt to take away property of the petitioner and other right holders in the village without payment of compensation, as such the action is hit by the provisions of Article 31A of the Constitution of India and as such cannot be sustained. Before implementation of the policy by the Gram Panchayat, the Gram Sabha was not taken into confidence. By stating as above, an apprehension was raised that if the Scheme is implemented, as proposed, in the village, probably no land will remain available to meet the future needs of the village population. The Gram Panchayat has passed a resolution, to allot plots, to a portion of the village population under threat and coercion from the District Administration. Resolution passed is not voluntary and free. Majority of the population is not happy with the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat. It was prayed that the Scheme and the consequent resolution, passed by the Gram Panchayat, being contrary to the provisions of the Act and the Rules be quashed.