Balwinder Kaur vs State of Punjab and another

Through this invocation under Article 226 of

Constitution of India the petitioner Balwinder Kaur, Ex-Sarpanch of Gram

Panchayat Dhakran, Block Nadala, Tehsil Bholath, District Kapurthala has

sought writ in the nature of certiorari seeking setting aside of orders dated

08.07.2016 passed by learned Director, Rural Development and Panchayats

Punjab Annexure P/2 and orders dated 9.3.2017 passed by the learned

Financial Commissioner, Rural Development and Panchayats Punjab,

Annexure P/4, whereby, the petitioner has been removed from the post of

Sarpanch.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and

perusal of the record. Undisputedly, a complaint was made to the Director,

Rural Development and Panchayats, Punjab regarding illegal encroachment

of Panchayat land by the petitioner/Sarpanch Balwinder Kaur and the

District Development Panchayat Officer through his letter No.2601 dated

16.12.2014 on the basis of report of Block Development and Panchayat

Officer, Nadala received through letter No.622 dated 21.8.2014 has come

to the conclusion that the petitioner along with Satnam Singh, Panch were

in illegal possession of shamlat land and upon demarcation it was

established and, thus, an action was taken by virtue of Section 20(1) (O) of

Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (in short, ''the Act'') against these persons

of the Gram Panchayat. After issuing show case notice and on receipt of

reply and finding them to be unsatisfactory leading to the passing of the

impugned orders. It is not out of place to refer here that even a civil remedy

availed off by the petitioner side did not meet any success and that is how

the petitioner along with Panch were relieved from the post of Sarpanch

by virtue of powers under Section 208(1) (K) of the Act. Upon appeal by

the petitioner the same was dismissed being meritless as it was abundantly

held that five and a half marla shamlat land was under the illegal

possession of appellant Balwinder Kaur.

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not show

cause to this Court how there has been circumvention of due recourse to

law by the concerned authorities resulting in miscarriage of justice

necessitating intervention by this Court. Though, learned counsel for the

petitioner has sought to place reliance on 2011(1) RCR (Civil) 28 Surinder

Kaur vs. Kulwant Kaur and others ; 2001(4) RCR (Civil) 735 Joginder

Kaur vs. State of Punjab but on account of factual disparity and the fact

that it is the petitioner herself who by virtue of her post as Sarpanch

happens to be in illegal occupation of shamlat land which she is still

carrying on impels this Court to hold that there is no merit in the present

petition and the same as such stands dismissed in limine.