Rajinder Kumar vs State of Haryana and Others

Jasbir Singh, J.—Reply, filed on behalf of respondents No. 2 to 4, is taken on record. It is grievance of the petitioner that respondent No. 5-Gram Panchayat, after filling up earth in the land reserved for johar, has started raising construction for the purpose of Dharamshala.

When notice of motion was issued on 20.05.2013, Deputy Commissioner, Karnal was directed to inspect the spot and submit a status report. After receiving that report on 27.05.2013, Gram Panchayat was restrained from raising any construction in the land entered as gair mumkin johar in the revenue record.

Thereafter, on 28.05.2013, following order was passed by the Court:

The Gram Panchayat is directed to show cause as to why it should not be proceeded against for violations of directions issued by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in "Hinch Lal Tiwari Versus Kamala

Counsel for the State of Haryana submits on the basis of a message, received from the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal, that the Gram Panchayat has constructed a 170'' wall in length 80'' inside the "Gair Mumkin Johar" but the construction has stopped.

Hinch Lal Tiwari Vs. Kamala Devi and Others, . It is also made clear that in case, the Gram Panchayat resumes construction, the concerned Block Development and Panchayat Officer, shall be held personally responsible.

It is stated by counsel for the petitioner that a water body is going to be filled up contrary to directions issued by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Hinch Lal Tiwari (supra).

Reply has been filed by Block Development & Panchayat Officer, Karnal on behalf of respondents No. 2 to 4 and it is stated that construction at the spot has been stopped.

Counsel for the Gram Panchayat states that johar in dispute was situated within the populated area and was causing inconvenience to the respondents. On account of that, it was decided to fill up the pond and use it for chaupal. It is further stated that in lieu of above pond, it was decided to dig up a pond of the same size outside the village.

Be that as it may. Under above circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition directing Deputy Commissioner, Karnal, to take note of dispute between the parties and after hearing the petitioners and the Gram Panchayat, pass an appropriate order, as per law. When any order is going to be passed, observations made by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Hinch Lal Tiwari''s case (supra) be kept in mind. Parties are directed to appear before the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal on 14.08.2013, who shall decide the case within one month thereafter by passing a speaking order.