Sandeep Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP-15970-2021 Date of decision: 20.08.2021 Sandeep Kumar ÉPetitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ÉRespondents CORAM: HONÕBLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Present:

Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Saurabh Mohunta, DAG, Haryana.

(Presence marked through video conference).

**** ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL) Petitioner herein, inter alia, seeks issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned Resolution dated 17.01.2021 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.5 being Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat.

Yesterday, the matter was heard and following order was passed:

ÒOn a Court query, how are instant proceedings maintainable against an order passed by Sarpanch of a Gram Panchayat directly before this Court under extra ordinary writ jurisdiction and why should petitioner be not relegated to seek his ordinary civil remedy by filing a civil suit or any other remedy, if so available otherwise, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to address arguments stating that writ remedy is the only option.

At his request, adjourned to 20.08.2021.Ó Apropos the aforesaid, learned State counsel has drawn my attention to Section 47 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act 1994, which reads as below:

Power to suspend action of Gram Panchayat.

47. (1) The District Development and Panchayat Officer or Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), as the case may be, by written order, suspend the execution of any resolution or order of the Gram Panchayat or prohibit the doing of any act which is about to be done or is being done under the provision of this Act. However, in special circumstances if in the opinion of the Director, the Gram Panchayat has committed gross negligence to perform its duties and functions, the Director may suo motu or on a complaint or report of the District Development and Panchayat Officer or Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), as the case may be, received in this behalf, and after giving a reasonable opportunity to explain to the Gram Panchayat concerned, may take necessary action and pass such orders as he may deem fit.

(2) In case the resolution or order is suspended by the District Development and Panchayat Officer or Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), as the case may be, he shall forthwith send a copy of the order passed by him in this behalf with a statement of reasons and with such explanation as the Gram Panchayat may offer, to the Director and the Director may thereupon confirm, modify or rescind the order.

(3) Any Gram Panchayat aggrieved by an order passed under this section, may within a period of thirty days from the date of communication of the order, prefer an appeal to the Government. Control and subordination.Ó A perusal of the above leaves no manner of doubt that petitioner has got alternative efficacious remedy. In the premise, this Court, therefore, refrains to directly entertain the writ petitions under extra ordinary writ jurisdiction qua the order and/or resolution assailed stated in to be passed by the Gram panchayat.

Dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to seek his remedy, in accordance with law.

The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that writ petition is maintainable against the Gram Panchayat being State is completely irrelevant as writ petition is not being dismissed on the ground that Gram Panchayat is not a State but on the ground of alternative remedy. 20.08.2021 (ARUN MONGA) vandana JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No