The Allahabad High Court while disposing a PIL directed the concerned department of the State to initiate some training programme for Pradhans within a period of three months, either on basis of Cluster or Commissionarate to make aware Pradhans, specifically women, about their rights and functions and to discourage concept of Pradhanpati.
A Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery passed this order while hearing a PIL filed by Ambika Yadav.
The bunch of public interest litigations (PIL) are filed by few villagers of concerned village mainly opposing construction of water tank and in one case construction of RCC Centre, on the land reserved in concerned village for Charagaah, Gadahi, Naveen Parti, Khalihaan or other public purposes.
Counsel for petitioners mainly argued that if a land is reserved for a particular purpose (such as Charagaah, Khalihaan etc), nature of same cannot be changed except in exceptional circumstances by due prescribed process, however, due process has not been followed in the cases and only on basis of resolution of Gram Sabha concerned, permission for construction was granted.
The Court noted that,
During hearing, a question was raised by the Court that, whether there is any dispute that construction of water tank or RCC Centre is a work of public interest, i.e, for the interest of villagers at large, to which counsel for petitioners have specifically stated that it is a work in larger public interest.
Another query was raised by the Court, whether due to construction of water tank or RCC Centre, nature of land reserved for a particular purpose would entirely change, i.e, whether the area used for said purpose is large or small, i.e, due to construction land would become useless for said purpose, but no specific answer was given by the counsel for petitioners.
However, Manish Goyal, Additional Advocate General, on the basis of instructions, submitted that construction is on a very small part of land which cannot change the nature of land, i.e, the purpose for which it is reserved and land can still be used for said purpose.
Another query was raised by the Court, whether there is any material on record that land was earlier used only for the purpose for which it was reserved and whether there is any material before this Court that at least during last five years or so, it was used for said purpose only, since no material has been brought on record.
In one of the cases it has been mentioned that land reserved for a particular public purpose is also used for marriage and other functions organized by villagers. In another public interest litigation, part of land is used as a playground.
Counsel for petitioners have vehemently referred Section 77 of UP Land Revenue Code that Bhumidhari right cannot be accrued in certain land which includes, Khalihaan, Manure pits and other land described therein.
However, said reliance is vehemently opposed by the Additional Advocate General referring to other provisions such as Sections 59 and 63(2)(a) of U.P. Revenue Code that it is not a case where Bhumidhari right has been created in favour of any person or party. The land always vests in the State Government and by an order it is reserved for specific purpose in Gaon Sabha.
Section 77 of U.P Revenue Code, bars that on a land reserved for public purpose, no bhumidhari rights can be created but sub-section (2) of Section 77 of U.P. Revenue Code provides that the class of public utility land may be changed under due procedure, whereas in the cases nature of land may not be changed since only a very small part is proposed to be used for other public purposes.
The land is being used for a public purpose which does not create any Bhumidhari right, therefore, the bar of Section 77 of U.P Revenue Code cannot come in way for construction of water tank or RCC Centre.
So far as correction in revenue record is concerned, no proceedings were undertaken either by Gaon Sabha concerned or petitioner, therefore, at this stage Court cannot enter into said dispute. However, in case construction has not been commenced and it is in the middle of said land, the project can be relooked so that it may be shifted to a corner, if other requirements are satisfied otherwise it may be made sure that construction of water tank may not render the land, if used as a Charagaah, later on unuseful, the court said.
The Court further noted that,
During hearing counsel for respective Gaon Sabhas have raised a problem that Pradhans of concerned Gaon Sabhas are not responding to their letters seeking instruction and for that this Court has passed an order for personal appearance of respective Pradhans of concerned Gaon Sabhas.
All Pradhans of respective Gaon Sabhas have appeared in person, except for Gaon Sabha Jagannathpur, Tehsil Nagina, District Bijnor. The Court has interacted with Pradhans which includes two women also but surprisingly none of the Pradhan knew about their functions, as mentioned in Section 15 of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.
The Additional Advocate General has submitted that he will take this matter before the concerned department to initiate some training programme either on the basis of Cluster or Commissionarate to make aware Pradhans, specifically women, about their rights and functions and to discourage the concept of Pradhanpati.
“The outcome of above discussion is that since there is no change of Bhumidhari rights, therefore, on basis of resolution of Gaon Sabha if State has taken a decision to use a very small part of land for the purpose of construction of water tank or RCC Centre, out of the land marked for the purpose of Charagaah, Naveen Parti, Khalihaan etc. the bar of Section 77 of U.P. Revenue Code would not come in the way, except if it is shown that there is mala fide, which is not the case in the PILs.
Petitioners have not come up with very specific case that land which is reserved for the purpose of Charagaah, Khalihaan etc. was earlier used for said purpose only since in some of the case it is used for marriage functions or playground also, therefore, objection on construction of water tank is nothing but an objection for the sake of it only”, the Court observed.
In aforesaid circumstances, the Court does not found that there is any merit to challenge the construction of water tank and RCC Centre which are also for interest of villagers and since land earmarked for it is undisputedly a very small part of respective land, which does not render said land unuseful for the said purpose as well as that since no Bhumidhari right is created, therefore, bar under Section 77 of U.P Revenue Code does not exist.
In view of above, the Court disposed of all the public interest litigations with direction to concerned department to initiate some training programme for Pradhans within a period of three months from today, either on basis of Cluster or Commissionarate to make aware Pradhans, specifically women, about their rights and functions and to discourage concept of Pradhanpati.
The post Allahabad High Court asks UP govt to train village pradhans, including women, in 3 months appeared first on India Legal.