RETD.MAJOR H.K. Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT, DHALLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition preferred by Major H.K.Justa son of Shri L.R. Justa, resident of Dipin Villa, Broadway Enclave Sanjauli, Shimla -6, is directed against the order of Commissioner Shimla Division dated18.12.1997 in Revenue Revision No. 199/97 whereby the revision of the present petitioner was dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner Sh. H.K. Justa vide his application dated 29.6.1995 applied to the Assistant, Collector 1st Grade Shimla (R) for correction of revenue entries in respect of land measuring 2 Bighas comprised in Khasra Nos. 153/65/1 (0 -15 Bighas), 63/1 (0 -6 Bighas), 151/62/1 (0 -15 Bighas) and 151/62/2 (0 -4), situated in Mauza Dhalli, Tehsil Shimla as per terms of agreement executed by him with the Gram Panchayat Dhalli. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade Shimla (R) rejected the application of the petitioner vide order dated 08.01.1996 holding that under Section 112 of H.P. Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, the Pardhan Gram Panchayat was not entitled and competent to make any agreement with regard to the land in ownership of the Panchayat without the prior approval of the Govt. Against this order dated 08.01.1996 the petitioner filed a review petition before the Assistant Collector 1st Grade on 18.04.1996 which was also dismissed by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade on 7.1.1997 as barred by limitation.

(3.) Aggrieved of both the orders of Assistant Collector 1st grade dated 8.1.1996 and 7.1.1997, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sub -Divisional Collector Shimla (R) on the grounds that the Assistant Collector 1st Grade had rejected review petition without giving opportunity of being heard. He further contended that he had been paying rent @ of Rs.240/ - per month regularly to the Gram Panchayat and had paid consideration amount of Rs. 1240/ -to the Gram Panchayat Dhalli as per agreement dated 11.3.1988. It had further been alleged that the land in dispute was in his possession and the Gram Panchayat was competent to lease out the land in dispute and the requisite permission from the Govt. had already been obtained before granting the lease to him.