High Courts(1989) 07 P&H CK 0001

Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat, Kalaundhi vs Gurcharan Singh

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 27 July 1989 · Citation: (1990) 2 LJR 434 : (1989) 2 RCR(Criminal) 511 : (1989) 2 RRR 345

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.S.Grewal, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 144 of 1989

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 401 words

S.S. Grewal, J.—This revision petition is directed against the order of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Fatehgarh Sahib, dated 10th of

December, 1988, whereby it was held that the order of the Gram Panchayat was illegal and the same cannot be executed.

2.

In brief, facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are, that Gram Panchayat, Kalaundhi, imposed a fine of Rs. 500/ under sections 21/23 of

the Gram Panchayat Act, 1952, upon the present respondent. An application under section 48 of the said Act to execute the said order was

moved before the learned Magistrate who, on the basis of Division Bench authority of this Court reported as Naurang Lal v. The Gram Panchayat

of village Gujrawas, 1964 P.L.R. 28, held that the Gram Panchayat has no power to impose prospective recurring penalty at the stage of first

conviction for the breach. In such a case course to be adopted by the Panchayat is to summon the offender from time to time if he has not removed

the encroachment and continue imposing on him the recurring fine as and when it becomes due, and prescribed in the section. The aforesaid

Division Bench authority was overruled by Full Bench of this Court in Subh Ram and others v. Gram Panchayat, Dhani Phogat and another,

1986(2) P.L.R. 134 : 1986 R.R.R. 174 wherein the majority view was ""that the disobedience of an order passed under section 21 of the Act does

not amount to an offence in terms of section 23 thereof, that the order passed under section 23 is in exercise of administrative jurisdiction, and that

under section 23 recurring fine can legitimately be imposed by Gram Panchayat in anticipation of the subsequent, and continuing, disobedience of

its order.

3.

In view of the Full Bench authority it was conceded by the learned counsel for the parties that the learned Magistrate has no jurisdiction to

execute the order imposing fine under Sections 21/23 of the said Act. Specific procedure for recovery of such fine has been laid, which is covered

by the section 85 of the said Act. The Gram Panchayat may if it is so advised, have recourse to remedy provided under section 85 of the said Act

for recovery of fine.

4.

For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is set aside and this revision is allowed to be extent indicated

above.

Revision allowed.