IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
***
CWP No. 4198 of 2004.
Date of decision: September 10, 2008.
***
GRAM PANCHAYAT BHANGURI AND OTHERS
Petitioners.
Versus
State of Punjab and others.
Respondents.
***
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur, CJ and
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant.
***
Present: Shri Hemant Saini, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Shri Amol Rattan Singh, Addl: AG, with
Mrs. Sonu Chahal, DAG, Punjab.
Shri Parveen Kumar Garg, Advocate, for
respondent No.4.
***
T.S.Thakur, CJ (Oral)
This petition purports to have been filed in Public Interest. It
prays for a writ of certiorari quashing the constitution of what is described
as Forest Protection Committees, on the ground that the said committees
have been constituted in violation of the provisions of the Punjab
Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and the regulations framed thereunder.
Appearing for the petitioner-Gram Panchayat, Bhanguri, Mr.
Hemant Saini submitted that the constitution of the Forest Protection
Committees and Management Committees were contrary to the
notification dated November 18, 2003 issued by the Government of
Punjab. He drew our attention to the contents of the said notification, para
1.3.2(i) whereof envisages nomination of Sarpanch of the concerned gram
Panchayats as an Ex-officio member of the Management Committees. He
contended that the constitution of the Management Committee relevant to
-2- CWP No. 4198 of 2004.
the petitioner-panchayat was in violation of the provisions of the said
notification, The net result was that the elected Sarpanches of the
Panchayats were never associated with the management of the affairs of
the Forest Protection Committees set up for Forest Protection and
Preservation Programs. He further argued that a large amount of monetary
assistance which was meant to be spent on Forest Protection and
Preservation Programs was disbursed to these committees during the last
Lok Sabha Elections in the year 2004, which amounts were according to
Mr. Saini, spent to promote political agendas.
On behalf of the respondents, Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, on the
other hand submitted that the Forest Protection Committees are
constituted as volunteer groups with a view to assisting the village
community for preservation and protection of Forest. Such committees are
constituted only in Forest Fringe Villages and are meant to lend assistance
to the Forest Protection and Preservation work by the communities living
in such areas. He further argued that the allegations regarding the
Sarpanches of the village Panchayats concerned not being associated with
the Management Committees was without any basis and that there was
nothing on the record to substantiate that any such Management
Committee had either mis-directed or mis-utilized the funds with or without
the assistance of the Sarpanch concerned. He argued that in case the
petitioner had any grievance regarding the Sarpanch of a particular village
not being associated with the Management Committee, a representation
could be made to the competent authority, who would examine the same
and ensure that the structural composition of the Committee remains
strictly in accordance with the notification dated November 18, 2003
issued by the Government of Punjab, on the subject.
We have given our careful consideration to the submissions
made at the Bar. We must at the out-set mention that the submissions
-3- CWP No. 4198 of 2004.
made at the Bar by Mr. Saini are at variance with the prayers made in the
writ petition. As noticed earlier, the prayer in the writ petition is for
quashing of the notification dated November 18, 2003 by which Forest
Protection Committees and Management Committees have been directed
to be established with the laudable object of protecting and preserving the
Forests in the Villages. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the
notification and the orders constituting such committees. The argument
advance by Mr. Saini before us on the other hand was that the committees
did not associate the Sarpanches of the Panchayats concerned, as was
required in terms of para 2.3.2(i) of the notification. There is, thus, a
palpable digression from the prayer made in the writ petition. It is one thing
to say that the constitution of the Forest Protection Committees and the
Management Committees in terms of the notification dated November 18,
2003 are illegal and deserve to be quashed, but entirely an different thing
to argue that the said committees are functioning without associating the
Sarpanches of the Panchayats concerned. If notification dated November
18, 2003 is illegal there is no question of the petitioner seeking protection
of any provisions contained therein. Be that as it may, a challenge to the
notification and the constitution of the committees under the same was not
pursued by Mr. Saini. All that we therefore need to mention is that such
committees are not statutory in character and are intended to involve
village community in the protection of Forests. These committees are
constituted and established under a Central sponsored scheme as is
evident from the circular dated December 24, 2002 and a Demi Official
Letter issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of
India, New Delhi dated March 03, 2003 requesting the concerned State
Governments to implement the said scheme. There is, in our opinion, no
conflict between the constitution of the committees in terms of the policy
on the one hand and the provisions by the Panchayati Raj Act, on the
-4- CWP No. 4198 of 2004.
other. We need not dilate on this part of the controversy any further since
Mr. Saini did not argue the matter on this aspect nor was it the case of the
petitioner that the committees were in any way trespassing into the
territory reserved for the Panchayats.
That bring us to the question whether there is any room for us
to issue any direction in Public Interest so far as the non-association of the
Sarpanches of the Village Panchayat is concerned. We asked Mr. Saini
whether he could show us any notification constituting a Management
Committee or a Forest Protection Committee which has excluded the
Sarpanch of the Panchayat concerned. He was however unable to draw
our attention to any such circular or notification. We, therefore, have no
option but to hold that the allegations regarding the exclusion of the
Sarpanches of the Panchayats concerned, were not substantiated before
us. All the same, we see no reason why the petitioner should not be given
liberty to take up the matter at an appropriate level with the government or
with the functionaries of the government to examine whether there is any
violation of the notification dated November 18, 2003 which nominates
Sarpanch of the Village of the Panchayat concerned, as Ex-officio
members in the Management Committee. Besides the petitioner will be at
liberty to point out to the authorities concerned the alleged mis-direction or
mis-utilization of the funds meant for various Programs. In case the
petitioner does make any such representation, the authorities concerned
are expected to look into the matter and pass appropriate orders.
With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of,
leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
(T.S.THAKUR)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(SURYA KANT)
September 10, 2008 JUDGE
Malik