SAROJ Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I propose to dispose of these revision petitions together which have been filed against the appellate order dated 5-4-1997 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Nohar whereby the learned appellate Court dismissed the appeal filed by each petitioner and the order of the trial Court dated 23-8-1996 was affirmed.

(2.) All these petitioners are the residents of village Malwani, Tehsil Nohar, District Hanumangarh. Each petitioner applied to the Gram Panchayat, Ratanpura for the grant of patta in respect of a piece of land situated in the jurisdiction of village Malwani over which the petitioners were already in possession. The Gram Panchayat, after receipt of several applications for allotment of patta, granted 50 pattas to persons who were landless in the year 1991. The petitioners, after obtaining the pattas, erected boundary wall and each petitioner also constructed a room for his residence. The petitioners also put shades for keeping cattles and other household articles in the same plot. After elections, a new Panchayat was constituted for village Malwani. It is alleged that the candidate supported by the petitioners lost the election to the post of Sarpanch and one Hari Singh was elected as Sarpanch. On account of this election of Hari Singh as Sarpanch, political rivalry started. In retaliation, Hari Singh issued notices on 30-10-1995 to 25 persons who were granted pattas by the previous Sarpanch to show cause why their pattas be not cancelled. Eventually, the Sarpanch cancelled the pattas of the petitioners on the ground that the land comprised in the pattas of the petitioners had already been allotted and ear-marked for Gandhi Park in which Children Park, wells etc. were to be constructed. When the pattas of the petitioners were cancelled and their possession was threatened by the Gram Panchayat, each petitioner filed a suit in the Court for permanent injunction restraining the Gram Panchayat from interfering with their old and settled possession. Along with the suit, each petitioner also filed an application for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. supported by affidavits.

(3.) The non-petitioners contested the suit and also resisted the application of the each petitioner. It was alleged by the non-petitioners-defendants that the Sarpanch, Ratanpura, who had the jurisdiction at the relevant time, issued the above pattas in total violation of the Rules and Law. The land in respect of which the pattas were issued had already been allotted to Gandhi Park and has been ear-marked for constructing a Children Park and other welfare schemes. The concerned Sarpanch allotted the pattas without complying with the relevant Rules containing in Chapter XIII of the Rajasthan Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The persons, to whom the pattas were allotted by the Sarpanch, were not even eligible for the grant of patta inasmuch as they were having land in their ownership and possession. Even the applications filed by the petitioners were incomplete and the pattas were also issued in a hurry flouting of the Rules in this regard.