HIGH COURT OF KERALA
WP(C).No. 31650 of 2011 (E) ( 20 January, 2016)
1.It is the bounden duty of the Panchayat to remove all illegal encroachers and remove the constructions made. It has been so held in Jagpal Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others [2011 (1) KHC SN 39 (SC)]. It has been held therein as follows:-
"Before parting with this case we give directions to all the State Governments in the country that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorised occupants of Gram Sabha/ Gram Panchayat/ Poramboke/ Shamlat land and these must be restored to the Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. For this purpose the Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/Union Territories in India are directed to do the needful, taking the help of other senior officers of the Governments. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupant, after giving him a show cause notice and a brief hearing. Long duration of such illegal occupation or huge expenditure in making constructions thereon or political connections must not be treated as a justification for condoning this illegal act or for regularising the illegal possession. Regularisation should only be permitted in exceptional cases e.g. where lease has been granted under some Government notification to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, or where there is already a school, dispensary, or other public utility on the land."
2. Ext.P6 resolution of the Panchayat permitting the illegal occupants to continue at present cannot be countenanced. Ofcourse whether the occupants are entitled to assignment on registry is a different question. The application if any pending in that regard has to be dealt with in accordance with law. But the encroachers cannot continue if the assignment on registry is refused. There has been no proper application of mind by Panchayat in adopting Ext. P6 resolution. May be the suit filed by the predecessor in interest of the petitioner was dismissed. It is stated that the suit was dismissed on a technical ground only. The dismissal of the suit does not regularise the occupation of respondents 4 to 6. The Panchayat has to probe as to whether the occupation is on the basis of any semblance of right. I quash Ext. P6 resolution as being contrary to law.
3. Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to reconsider the issue with notice to the petitioner and respondents 3 to 6. The same shall be done within a period of two months from today. Status quo shall continue till orders are passed anew in that regard.
The writ petition is disposed of.
V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS
No comments:
Post a Comment