Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Short title, extent and commencement. (1) This Act may be called the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. (2) It extends to the whole of the State of Punjab. (3) It shall come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification, in the Official Gazette appoint. — Comments Constructing a Statute — While constructing a Statute, the court shall presume that the Legislature knows the existing law and does not intend to aller it except by THE PUNJAB PANCHAYATI RAJ ACT, 1994 13 express enaciment -- The court cannot proceed upon the assumption that the legislature has made a mistake, because, there is a strong presumption that the Legislature does not make mistakes -- IL is also well established that a Statute ought to be so construed that if it can be prevented no clause, sentence or word is rendered superfluous, void or insignificant unless the retention of such words or giving effect ta them leads to absurdity. Som Lal v. Vijay Laxmi etc., 2005(1) LA.R. 376 (P&H D B.). Interpretation of Statute -- Where the language of a Statule is unambiguous, ordinarily the preamble may not be resorted to explain its provisions -- However, the preamble is also an admissible aid to a Statute's construction especially, to find out as to what particular instances, the enactment is intended to apply -- Similarly, the Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to a Bill can also be referred to for the purpose of understanding the background and the antecedents, state of affairs leading upto the legislation -- Tille of a statute is also an important part of the Act and may be referred to for the purpose of ascertaining its general scope and of throwing light on its construction, although it cannot over-ride the clear meaning of the enactment. Som Lal v. Vijay Laxmi ete., 2006(1) L.A.R. 376 (P&H D.B.). Interpretation of statute -- Words of an enactment are to be given their ordinary, popular and natural meaning -- If such meaning is clear and unambiguous, the effect should be given to a provision of a statute in the same manner whatever may be the consequences -- If the language of a statute is clear, the only duly of the Court is to give effect to it and the Court has no business to look into the consequences of such interpretation -- Court is under an obligation to expound the law as it exists and leave the remedy to the legislature, even if harsh conclusions result from such exposition -- Equally, it is now well recognized proposition of law that mandatory provisions and command of law have to be complied with in the same manner as envisaged and mandated by any statute and it cannot be interpreted otherwise. Sukhwinder Kaur v. State of Punjab and others, 2011(3) L.A.R, 279 (P&H) Preamble -— Where the language of a Statute is unambiguous, ordinanly the preamble may not be resorted to explain its provisions —- However, the preamble is also an admissible aid to a Statute’s construction especially, to find oul as to what particular instances, the enactment is intended to apply -- Similarly, the Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to a Bill can also be referred to for the purpose of understanding the background and the antecedents, state of affairs leading upto the legislation -- Title of a statute is also an important part of the Act and may be referred to for the purpose of ascertaining its general scope and of throwing light on its construction, although it cannot over-ride the clear meaning of the enactment. Som Lal v. Vijay Laxmi etc. 2006(1) L.A.R. 376 (P&H D.B.). Principle of Harmonious construction -- Provisions of one Statute cannot be used to defeat provisions of the other Statute unless the court finds it impossible to effect reconciliation between the two sets of provisions -- Principle of “harmonious construction” requires that two conflicting provisions, which cannot be reconciled wath each other, should be so interpreted that, if possible, effect is given te both -- However, this principle cannot be stretched to render one of the provisions obscure or redundant. Som Lal v. Vijay Laxmi etc., 2006(1) L.A.R, 376 (P&H D.B.). Punjab State Election Commission Act, 4994 (19 of 1994), Section 1 — Nature of legislation -- Act No.9 of 1994 came into force in terms of Constitution (73rd Amendment) Act, 1992, replacing Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952, to establish a three tier Panchayati Raj System in the State of Punjab -- Act No.9 came into force wef. 21.4.1994, whereas Act No.19 of 1994 came into force w.e.f. 7.9.1994 -- As per Act No.19, State Election Commission has a power of superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls and ta conduct all elections to the Panchayats and Municipalities in the State of Punjab -- Act No.19 is a complete Code in itself providing for guidance in almast all contingencies, it provides the reliefs under Section 87 — U/s 87, Election Tribunal has the power lo declare the election of any 14 THE PUNJAB PANCHAYAT RAJ ACT, 1994 Panch or Sarpanch illegal afier conclusion of the trial of election petition. Surjit Singh v Presiding Officer and others, 2010(2) L.A.R 691 (P&H) CHAPTER - | PRELIMINARY