Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harnek Singh And Another vs Harmel Singh And Another on 4 July, 2012
Author: Rakesh Kumar Garg
Bench: Rakesh Kumar Garg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
COCP No.2 of 2004
Date of decision: 4th July, 2012
Harnek Singh and another
Petitioners
Versus
Harmel Singh and another
Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
Present: Mr. Dhirinder Chopra, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. O.P. Goyal, Senior Advocate with
Ms. Ravinder Kaur, Advocate for the respondents.
RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J.
This petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India has been filed for taking action against the respondents, who allegedly disobeyed the interim order dated 24th July, 1992 passed by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.6122 of 1992.
The brief facts emerging out of this petition and which are necessary for disposal of this case are that land measuring 181 Bighas 3 Biswas of village Sheikhupura was acquired vide award dated 27th March, 1991 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Collector, Jalandhar for a total amount of compensation of Rs.25,36,354.17. As per the revenue record, the above said land was reserved for Charand and was vesting in the Gram Panchayat.
It is a matter of record that the petitioners along with Harmel Singh son of Jora Singh etc. filed a petition under Section 42 of the East COCP No.2 of 2004 2 Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Consolidation Act') stating that the aforesaid land was reserved for Charand against the provisions of law as the same was in excess of the area which was to be left for the said purpose as per the appendix attached with the Act and since the land was reserved after making a cut from the right-holders, the same was mutated wrongly in the name of Nagar Panchayat and the same was to be treated as 'Jumla Mustarka Malkan Hasab Rasad Raqba Khewat', which was to be distributed amongst the right-holders of the village. However, the said petition was contested by the Gram Panchayat on the ground that the land in question could not be distributed as the same was vested rightly in the Panchayat being Shamlat land. The Director, Land Records, Punjab exercising powers under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act vide order dated 7th April, 1992 allowed the said petition holding that the aforesaid land be re-distributed to the petitioners after reserving an area of 2 acres or 4 acres for Charand as per law.
The said order was challenged by the Gram Panchayat of village Sheikhupura by filing Civil Writ Petition No.6122 of 1992.
At this stage, it may also be noticed that vide order dated 20th May, 1992, the respondent-authorities were restrained from disbursing the amount of compensation to the private respondents No.3 to 15 (i.e. proprietors/petitioners in this contempt petition). Thereafter, on an application filed by respondent No.1 in this petition (respondent No.4 in the writ petition), the following order was passed by this Court on 24th July, 1992:
"Present: Mr.Jasbir Singh, Advocate.
COCP No.2 of 2004 3
Notice for 10.8.1992.
In the meantime, petitioner is restrained from utilizing the compensation amount.
Sd/-
(G.R. Majithia) Judge Sd/-
(A.S. Nehra) 24.7.1992 Judge"
It is alleged in this petition that in spite of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the amount of compensation which was deposited in the savings bank account of Gram Panchayat, Sheikhupura has been misutilized by respondent No.1 who remained Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat and thus, the respondents, who have violated the aforesaid interim order dated 24th July, 1992, are liable for punishment under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the documents placed on record of this petition as well as CWP No.6122 of 1992.
It is not in dispute that CWP No.6122 of 1992 was allowed and stood disposed of vide judgment dated 27th April, 2005, whereby the order Annexure P-3, dated 7th April, 1992 of the Director, Land Records, Punjab (but mentioned as order dated 16.12.1991 in the judgment) was set aside being without jurisdiction.
At this stage, it may also be pertinent to refer to the observations of this Court, which are relevant for disposal of the instant petition. The same read as under:COCP No.2 of 2004 4
"Before parting with the judgment, it would be appropriate to mention here that the land in dispute stands acquired by the State of Punjab for the benefit of the Union of India. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner was restrained from utilizing the compensation payable for the acquisition of the land pursuant to an order of this Court dated 24.7.1992. With the disposal of the present writ petition, the aforementioned restraint would obviously come to an end and compensation shall be disbursed, in accordance with law.
In view of what has been stated above, the present writ petition is allowed and the order of the Director Land Records (Annexure P-3) is set aside, being without jurisdiction. The parties would be at liberty to seek an adjudication of the question of title, if any, before the appropriate forum."
It is well settled that the interim order merges in the final order. Moreover, vide judgment dated 27th April, 2005, this Court has already found the Gram Panchayat to be the rightful owner of the land in question, meaning thereby the Gram Panchayat, Sheikhupura was entitled to receive/utilize the amount of compensation for the land in question and in fact the petitioners have no right to claim any right in the aforesaid amount.
For the sake of arguments, even if the respondents, during pendency of the writ petition, had violated the interim order but the fact remains that many years have already elapsed and in fact in final adjudication of the case the Gram Panchayat has been held to be the rightful owner of the said amount of compensation. Even if the petitioners have any grievance with regard to misutilization of the funds of Gram Panchayat, they may be having any other alternative forum for redressal COCP No.2 of 2004 5 of their grievance. But certainly, this Court is of the view that the continuation of contempt proceedings against the respondents will not be of any use.
In view of the observations of learned Single Judge while passing the judgment dated 27th April, 2005 in CWP No.6122 of 1992 and the fact that the petitioners are at liberty to seek the relief in accordance with the law for redressal of their grievances, this Court does not find any merit in this contempt petition for violation of the interim order dated 24th July, 1992, which has come to an end with the decision of the writ petition, whereby the impugned order dated 7th April, 1992/16th December, 1991 allotting the land in question in favour of the petitioner has been quashed.
Thus, this petition is dismissed.
Rule discharged.
(RAKESH KUMAR GARG) JUDGE July 4, 2012 rps