Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Pert of. utie he Panchayats ay A Wher @ eae no dll Sane, a AAS AY iy Ei i saga function upon, tt-by 9 under this, Actiory aw for: time: being.in.fc or.bnel tslimed2 si! aperem © t . os rae bre eee Wihieetg t ne: Vl = whisinam ty a PS Ones of eine bes nchayet, Piet 2 yOS) Develo aie Sed wie Hiss neve! sift om 2sranes" art to Den Oia efi in ithescaserof Teele Sarhithor a Zia Parishad the: avanio bre ds ims 12 v fipme deel “apelliv ect to Inemaclavab sii no eine (Had 88S FLA J (EP ros by.an.erder in w fete re ie the, ermal eidivty.and Haat not. pertorme oi fas a oan sn aber personite perfomashe d Cee ee ea arc incidental to; its performance:shall ebe oad d oydhe Grane Pomona abo ninic cn ORGS HTP HE GBiNiOH? Bf the’ Pieper “Rag Fatea des: eal nea abe a iminister Tat 1 ie Sree e, in Ge ae AG oe PWM a Kaen 4 fT es Maid te CAT IGE SSP Ui at Sr toreshed a i es a = SDP AVNET that the? Dinsetor may: way oe i ment and thereupon the adminis es eal Be yt the cotiderned Panchayat ge —1ievein of the £ inaminiogg’s e259 1 Soll Panchayat: Zen nah Suess "@) salle og 6g win ber 26 re -Aopersonapnointec under sub-section ) shallexercise. all such, Sewers congehrorreganrior GOsereaty andar thisActh: naan dhan Seen pebscenidt ane rie parent re ve" Sennen ; snenaéd) Thésincatrie' from the mana: enteofthe property: referred 0° an stitseetion (2 (2) shan be ‘tredited 40° fond ‘of the’ Sticttar ot S0en ad a vents aeiaing Foon See patti i toa , including the ol aan payable t ae Ghgat SUB-geetgn Sta BS ist out oF the cong rea Parksiajar tin, anieps madgl od Neo moos ted? yanspnilnas 13 nny herein wilaapes heros erie onset, * “Soo IL ea oh a ie eg eet yadic bis deinu4 to of iste a ripnie pnibasq efiijein: thecasec of-@.Panchayat Samitiare ZilacRadshad; the elqinaa of ts hifentGrol navip eew ae a on ter! s1oleS-- speliiv to aAow ia ARUN ‘aniordar di > Eris layind’'¢ ae Pof the fin ve Panchayat con . fom ee a 4p.part from such fund and if such a person does not comply a the cee Seer oe amount. from the,fund of the RaachavAl AR ATERAT® QAMANS ORO, alusi to InsminioggA = nevig esw ponies brs gaifon on fen! sted — ‘bei re Jel nehc’ oF fGE LAG (S)S00° sess 2'dinieH Wye ened ‘ebiaa fez od ot sldeil ai woleeninbA Be 134 THE PUNJAB PANCHAYATI RAJ ACT, 1994 Comments Appointment of Administrator -- !f the Panchayat failed to perform any duty within the time specified, then the DDPO and the Director, as the case may be, have the power and junsdiction to appoint an Administrator. Jasbir Singh v. State of Punjab and others, 2011(3) L-A.R. 688 (P&H). Appointment of Administrator - Quorum of the Gram Panchayat was not complete -- Panches are not co-operating with Sarpanch -- Sanctioned grants for construction of drains, streets, ponds, circular roads etec., latrines, sports, 12th Finance Commission and Panchayat funds to manage the shamilat land, could not be spent on the development works of the village — Held, development of the village cannot possibly be permitted to be jeopardized or hampered by the petty (village) politics and mentality of the Panches in this relevant direction - DDPO did not have any olher alternative/option, but to appoint the Administrator ta spend the indicated sanctioned grants on the development of the village. Jasbir Singh v. State of Punjab and others. 2011(3) LAR. 688 (P&H). ; Appointment of Administrator — Rule of Natural Justice -- Administrator was appointed to complete pending work of village —Before that no opportunity was given to Panchayat to complete development work and no opportunity of hearing was afforded — Appointment of Administrator is liable to be set aside, Harbans Kaur Kainth’s case, 2002(2) PLJ 393 relied. Ranjit Kaur and Others v. State of Punjab and Others, 2006(1) L.A.R. 546 (P&H D.B.). Appointment of Administrator — Rule of Natural Justice - Administrator was appointed to conduct cases relating to ‘Shamlat Deh land’ — Before that no notice and hearing was given — Appointment of Administrator is liable to be set aside, Harbans Kaur Kainth’s case, 2002(2) PLJ 393 relied. Gurjant Singh v. The Special Secretary, Punjab Government, Rural Development & Panchayat Department, Punjab. Chandigarh and others, 2006(1) L-A.R. 550 (P&H 0.B.). Appointment of Administrator - Section 200 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, inter alia, provides the procedure which has to be followed in case of defaull in performance of duties by the Panches. li is not disputed that the procedure as contemplated under Section 200 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act was not even invoked much less than followed, On the respondent's own showing the charge was given to the petitioner on August 25, 1998. On the same day the District Development and Panchayat Officer is alleged to have sent a communication vide letter No. 1087 alleging that the quorum is not complete. A recommendation was made that the 3" Respondent be appointed as Administrator -- Action is absolutely arbitrary — Arnik Singh, Sarpanch, Village Chanarthal Khurd W/s District Development and Panchayat Officer, Fatehgarh Sahib and others 2000 (2) PLR 712 (P&H High Court DB) = 1999 (1) PLR 417(P&H High Court DB). Jurisdiction — A perusal of section 200 (2) of the Act shows that itis only in one contingency that action can be taken against the petitioner i.e. if he has failed to perform any duty other than the judicial function, within the time specified by the District Development and Panchayat Officer, then and only then, the District Development and Panchayat Officer would have the jurisdiction to appoint an Administrater — Harbant Singh V/s State of Punjab and other 1995 (1) PLR 303 (P&H High Court). Rule of Natural Justice — Administrator was appointed to complete pending work of village —Before that no opportunity was given to Panchayat to complete development work and no opportunity of hearing was afforded — Appointment of Administrator is liable to be set aside, Harbans Kaur Kainth's case, 2002(2) PLJ 393 relied. Ranjit Kaur and Others v. State of Punjab and Others, 2006(1) L.A.R. 546 (P&H D.B.). Rule of Natural Justice -- Administrator was appointed to conduct cases relating to ‘Shamlat Deh land’ — Before that no notice and hearing was given — Appointment of Administrator is liable to be set aside, Harbans Kaur Kainth’s case, 2002(2) PLJ 393 THE PUNJAB PANCHAYAT! RAJ ACT, 1994 135 ab Government, Rural Development relied. Gugant Singh v. The Special Secretary, Punj 006(1) L.A.R. 550 (P&H & Panchayat Department, Punjab, Chandigarh and others, 2 D.B.).