Holding

Declarations of Gram Sabha area and establishment under Sections 3 and 4 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 are legislative acts not subject to the rule of natural justice, and therefore no hearing was required, the notifications could be issued simultaneously, and the inclusion of the partially contiguous Harijan Colony was valid.

Summary

The Punjab Government issued notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 to declare the territorial area of a new Gram Sabha (Khanpur) and to establish it, thereby excluding parts of the existing Gram Sabha (Wazidpur). Sarpanch and a Gram Panchayat member of Wazidpur challenged the notifications, arguing that a hearing was required, that the Harijan Colony was not contiguous, and that the two notifications could not be issued simultaneously. The Supreme Court held that the powers under Sections 3 and 4 are legislative in nature and not subject to the rules of natural justice unless the statute expressly provides for a hearing. Since the Act contains no such provision, no hearing was required, the notifications could be issued together, and the Harijan Colony was found to be partially contiguous, satisfying the statutory requirement. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court’s order and allowed the appeal.

Issues considered

Whether the State Government was required to give an opportunity of hearing to residents before issuing notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
Whether notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act could be issued simultaneously.
Whether the Harijan Colony, being non‑contiguous to village Khanpur, could be included in Gram Sabha Khanpur under Section 3(ii) of the Act.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 226
Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952
Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994s. 10, s. 3, s. 4

Subjects

Gram SabhaPunjab Panchayati Raj Actnatural justicelegislative poweropportunity of hearingcontiguitynotificationArticle 226

Judgment

STATE OF PUNJAB A
v.
TEHAL SINGH AND ORS.

JANUARY 7, 2002

[V.N. KHARE AND B.N. AGRAWAL, JJ.] B

State Government-Notifications-Declaring territorial area and
establishment of Gram Sabha-Residents-Exclusion of area from a Gram
Sabha and inclusion in another-Duty of Government to provide opportunity C
of hearing to residents-Held, establishment and constitution of Gram Sabha
is a legislative Act-No opportunity of hearing was required to be given by
Government-Notifications held valid.

Legislative Acts-Applicability of principles of natural justice.
D
The Government of Punjab issued a Notification dated 24.10.1997 under
Section 3 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. Under the said Notification
the Government declared the territorial area of Gram Sabha Khanpur
comprising ofabadi portions of Village Wazidpur and villages Khanpur and
Harijan Colony. By another Notification of the same date, the Government E
declared the establishment of Gram Sabha, Khanpur under Section 4 of the
Act. The Government also constituted Gram Panchayat for the Gram Sabha,
Khanpur. Respondent No. 1, Sarpanch of Gram Sabha, Wazidpur and
Respondent No. 2, Member of the Gram Panchayat, Wazidpur filed a writ
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the
Notifications dated 24.10.1997 contending that (i) no opportunity of hearing F
having been afforded before declaring the territorial area ofvillage Khanpur
in as much as before establishing Gram Sabha Khanpur, the Notifications
were invalid; (ii) the locality-Harijan Colony not being contiguous to village
Khanpur, the said locality could not have been included in Gram Sabha,
Khanpur and (iii) the Notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act could G
not have been issued simultaneously and, therefore, they were invalid. The
1;_ writ petition was allowed by the High Court and the impugned Notifications
to the extent it related to the Gram Sabha, Khanpur were set aside. Against
the judgment of the High Court State of Punjab preferred appeal before this
Court.
H
27
28 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2002] l S.C.R.

A Following questions arose for consideration in this appeal:-

(1) Whether the State Government was required to give an \
opportunity of hearing to the residents of the area excluded from
Gram Sabha, Wazidpur and now included in the Gram Sabha,
~ l
Khanpur before issuing Notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of
B Act, respectively declaring territorial area of Gram Sabha,
Khanpur and establishing Gram Sabha, Khanpur;

(2) Whether the Notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act
could be issued simultaneously; and

c (3) Whether the Harijan Colony being not contiguous to the village
Khanpur it could not have been included in Gram Sabha, Khanpur
under Section 3(ii) of the Act.

Allowing the appeal and setting aside the impugned judgment, the Court
D
HELD: 1. The provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Punjab Panchayati
Raj Act, 1994 which provide for declaring territorial area of a Gram Sabha
and establishing a Gram Sabha for that area do not concern with the interest
of an individual citizen or a particular resident of that area. The power
E exercisable under Sections 3 and 4 respectively by the Government is not an
exercise of a judicial or quasi-judicial function where the very nature of
function involves the principle of natural justice or in any case an
administrative function affecting the rights of an individual. On making of
declaration under Section 3 of the Act determining the territorial area of a
Gram Sabha and thereafter establishing a Gram Sabha for that area is an act
F legislative in character in the context of the provisions of the Act.(34-E-F]

2. An act legislative in character-primary or subordinate, is not
subjected to rule of natural justice. In case of legislative act of legislature,
no question of application of rule of natural justice arises. However, in case
G of subordinate legislation, the legislature may provide for observance of
principle of natural justice or provide for hearing to the resident of the area
before making any declaration in regard to the territorial area of a Gram >
Sabha and also before establishing a Gram Sabha for that area. Where the
legislature has provided for giving an opportunity of hearing before excluding
an area from a Gram Sabha and including it in another local authority or
H body, an opportunity of hearing is sine qua non and failure to give such an
STATE OF PUNJAB v. TEHAL SINGH 29
opportunity of hearing to the residents would render the declaration invalid. A
But where the legislature in its wisdom has not chosen to provide for any
opportunity of hearing or observance of principle of natural justice before
issue of a declaration either under Section 3 or Section 4 of the Act, the
residents of the area cannot insist for giving an opportunity of hearing before
the area where they are residing is included in another Gram Sabha or local B
authority. (34-H; 35-A, C-D)

3. In the present case, the provisions of the Act do not provide for any
opportunity of hearing to the residents before any area falling under a
particular Gram Sabha is excluded and included in another Gram Sabha. In
the absence of such a provision, the residents of that area which has been C
excluded and included in a different Gram Sabha cannot make a complaint
regarding denial of opportunity of hearing before issue of declarations under
Sections 3 and 4 of the Act respectively. However, the position would be
different where a house of a particular resident of an area is sought to be
excluded from the existing Gram Sabha and included it in another Gram Sabha.
There the action of the Government being directed against an individual, the D
• Government is required to observe principles of natural justice. Therefore,
no opportunity of hearing was required to be given before making declarations
either under Section 3 or 4 of the Act by the Governmem. [36-A-B-C)

4. The High Court had taken a view that since an opportunity of hearing
was required to be given before assuming a declaration under Section 3 of E
the Act, therefore, Notifications under Sections 3 and 4 could not have been
issued simultaneously. This view is erroneous, because no opportunity of
hearing was required to be given before issue of declaration under Section 3
of the Act. (36-D)

5. The Harijan Colony although not totally, but partially is contiguous F
to village Khanpur. Therefore, there was substantial compliance of provision
of sub-section (i) of Section 3 of the Act. Consequently, the view taken by the
High Court was erroneous. (36-E)

Ramesh Chandra Kachardas Porwa/ & Ors. etc. v. State of Maharashtra
& Ors. etc., (1981) 2 SCC 722 and Union of India & Anr. v. Cynamide India G
Ltd. & Anr., (1987) 2 SCC 720, referred to.
)

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5826 of 1999.
From the Judgment and Order dated 31. 7. 98 of the Punjab and Haryana
High Court in C.W.P. No. 17039of1997. H
30 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] 1 S.C.R.

A Ranbir Yadav for R.S. Suri for the Appellant.
K.K. Mohan for Respondent No. 4.

Hari Shankar K. for Respondents No. 1-3.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
B
V.N. KHARE, J. There is village called Wazidpur in Block Ghat Khurd
in the district of Firozepur, Punjab. For the said village and certain other
adjoining areas, Gram Sabha, Wazidpur was constituted and established under
Section 4 of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as
the '1952 Act'). The areas included in the said Gram Sabha were villages
C Khanpur and Harijan Colony. After 73rd Constitutional amendment Act, 1992
came into force Punjab legislature enacted the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act,
1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in conformity with the provisions of
Part IX of the Constitution. After the Act came into force, it appears that the
residents of village Khanpur represented to the Government for having an
D independent Gram Sabha for village Khanpur by including certain portions of
area of Gram Sabha, Wazidpur. The Government after making inquiry issued
notifications dated 24.10.97 under Sections 3, 4 and 10 of the Act respectively.
By the said notification, the Government under Section 3 of the Act declared
the territorial area of Gram Sabha, Khanpur comprising of abadi portions of
village Wazidpur and village Khanpur and Harijan Colony. By another
E notification of the same date, the Government declared the establishment of
Gram Sabha, Khanpur under Section 4 of the Act. The Government also
constituted Gram Panchayat for the Gram Sabha, Khanpur. It was at this stage,
respondent No. l, who was Sarpanch of Gram Sabha, Wazidpur and respondent
No. 2, who was the Member of the Gram Panchayat, Wazidpur filed a writ
F petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the
notifications dated 24.10.97. The contentions raised by the writ petitioners
before the High Court inter alia, were that no opportunity of hearing having
been afforded before declaring the territorial area of village Khanpur inasmuch
as before establishing Gram Sabha, Khanpur, the notifications were invalid;
that, the locality Harijan Colony not being contiguous to village Khanpur, the
G said locality could not have been included in Gram Sabha, Khanpur and, that,
the notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act could not have been
~
issued simultaneously and, therefore, the notifications are invalid. The aforesaid
contentions advanced by the writ petitionerS' found favour with the High I
Court. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed and the impugned
H notifications dated 24.10.97 to the extent it related to the Gram Sabha, Khanpur
STATE OF PUNJAB v. TEHAL SINGH [V.N. KHARE, J.] 31

were set aside. It is against the said judgment of the High Court, the State A
of Punjab has preferred this appeal by way of special leave petition.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant assailed the reasoning
given by the High Court and argued that none of the reasons given by the
High Court while allowing the writ petitions is tenable in law and, therefore,
the judgment under challenge deserves to be set aside. B
After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the view that
following questions arise for our consideration in this appeal.

(!) Whether the State Government was required to give an opportunity
of hearing to the residents of the area excluded from Gram Sabha, C
Wazidpur and now included in the Gram Sabha, Khanpur before
issuing notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of Act, respectively
declaring territorial area of Gram Sabha, Khanpur and establishing
Gram Sabha, Khanpur;

(2) whether the notifications under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act could D
be issued simultaneously; and

(3) whether the Harijan colony being not contiguous to the village
Khanpur could not have. been included in Gram Sabha, Khanpur
under Section 3(ii) of the Act.
E
Coming to the first question, it is necessary to set out the relevant
provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, which are as under:

"3. Establishment of Gram Sabha areas. (I) The State Government
may, by notification, declare any village or group of contiguous villages
with a population of not less than two hundred to constitute a Gram F
Sabha area:

Provided that a new Gram Sabha area may be constituted for any
village or group of contiguous villages in respect of a separate distinct
abadi or group of abadis having a population of not less than two
hundred taking into consideration its physical distance from the main G
village or villages, as the case may be, and other relevant facts:

Provided further that neither the whole nor any part of-

(a) a Notified Area under Section 24 I of the Punjab Act, 1911, or any
other Act for the time being in force; or H
32 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] I S.C.R

A (b) a Cantonment; or

(c) a Municipal of any class; or

(d) a Municipal Corporation;

shall be included in a Gram Sabha area unless the majority of voters
B in any Notified Area or Municipality of the Third Class desire the
establishment of a Gram Sabha in which case the assets and liabilities,
if any of the Notified Area Committee or the Municipal Committee, as
the case may be, shall vest in the Gram Panchayat of that Gram Sabha '
and the Notified Area Committee or the Municipal Committee shall
c cease to exist.

(2) That State Government may, by notification, include any area in or
exclude any area from the Gram Sabha area.

4. Constitution of Gram Sabha. (I) The State Government may, by
D notification establish a Gram Sabha by name for every area declared
as Gram Sabha area under Section 3.

(2) Every person who is entered as voter on the electoral roll prepared
by the State Election Commission and for the time being in force
pertaining to the area of a Gram Sabha, shall be member of the Gram
E Sabha"

Before we consider the main question, it is necessary to trace out the
nature of power, that the State Government exercises under provisions of
Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. The said power could either be legislative,
administrative or quasi-judicial.
F
In Rameshchandra Kachardas Porwal and Ors. etc. v. State of
Maharashtra and Ors. etc., [ 1981] 2 SCC 722, it was held that making of a
declaration by notification that certain place shall be principal market yard for
a market area under the relevant agricultural produce Market Act was an act
legislative in character. In Union of India and Anr. v. Cynamide India Ltd.
G and Anr., [1987] vol. 2 sec 720, this Court while making distinction between
legislative, administrative and quasi-judicial held thus:

"A legislative act is the creation and promulgation of a general rule
of conduct without reference to particular cases; an administrative act
is the making and issue of a specific direction or the application of
H
STATE OF PUNJAB v. TEHAL SINGH [V.N. KHARE, J.] 33
a general rule to a particular case in accordance with the requirements A
of policy. Legislation in the process of formulating a general rule of
conduct without reference to particular cases and usually operating
in future; administration is the process of performing particular acts,
of issuing particular orders or of a making decisions which apply
general rules to particular cases'. It has also been said: "Rule making B
is normally directed toward the formulation or requirements having a
general application to all members of a broadly identifiable class"
while, "an adjudication, on the other hand, applies to specific
individuals or situation". But, this is only a broad distinction, not
necessarily always true. Administration and administrative adjudication
may also be of general application and there may be legislation of C
particular application only. That is not ruled out. Again, adjudication
determines past and present facts and declares rights and liabilities
while legislation indicates the future cause of action. Adjudication is
determinative of the past and the present while legislation in indicative

. of future. The object of the rule, the reach of its application. The
rights and obligations arising out of it. Its intended effect on past, D
present and future events, its form, the manner of its promulgation are
some factors which may help; in drawing the line between legislative
and non-legislative acts".
The principles of law that emerge from the aforesaid decisions are-( I)
where provisions of a statute provide for the legislative activity, i.e. making E
of a legislative instrument or promulgation of general rule of conduct or a
declaration by a notification by the Government that certain place or area shall
be part of a Gram Sabha and on issue of such a declaration certain other
statutory provisions come into an action forthwith which provide for certain
consequences; (2) where the power to be exercised by the Government under p
provisions of a statute does not concern with the interest of an individual and
it relates to public in general or concerns with a general direction of a general
character and not directed against an individual or to a particular situation
and (3) lay down future course of actions, the same its generally held to be
legislative in character.
G
Viewed in the light of the statement of law stated hereinbefore, we find
that the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act which provide for declaring
territorial area of a Gram Sabha and establishing a Gram Sabha for that area
do not concern with the interest of an individual citizen or a particular resident
of that area. Declaration contemplated under Sections 3 of the Act relates to
an area inhabited by the residents which is sought to be excluded or included H
34 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2002] l S.C.R

A in a Gram Sabha. The declaration under Section 3 of the Act by the Government
is general in character and not directed to a particular resident of that area.
Further, the declarations so made under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act do not
operate for the past transactions but for future situations. Under the aforesaid
situation, when declarations by issue of notifications by the Government are
B made under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act respectively, determining the territorial
area of a Gram Sabha and establishing a Gram Sabha for that area, such
declarations become operative at one. Once declarations are made under
Sections 3 and 4 of the Act respectively and thereafter a Gram Panchayat is
constituted under Section I 0 of the Act, the entire remaining provisions of
the Act becomes operative. On such declarations by a notification in the
C gazette, the Gram Sabha-a body corporate comes into being with a number
of powers and functions conferred upon it under the Act. As soon as a Gram
Sabha is established and Gram Panchayat is constituted, they are entrusted
with many general functions viz., constructions, repair, and maintenance of
community assets, agriculture including agriculture extension, animal
husbandry, dairy and poultry, fisheries, social and farm forestry, minor forest
D produce fuel and fodder, khadi, village and cottage industries, rural housing,
rural electrification including distribution of electricity, non-conventional energy
source, poverty alleviation programme, education including primary and
secondary schools, adult and non-formal education, promotion of adult literacy,
cultural activities, fairs and festivals, public health and family welfare; women
E and child development, social welfare etc. Further, Gram Sabhas and Gram
Panchayats have been conferred numerous other powers and duties
enumerated in Section 35 of the Act. Besides that, the Gram Panchayat is
entrusted with the judicial functions which are civil and criminal in nature. The
power exercisable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act respectively by the
Government was, therefore, not an exercise of a judicial or quasi-judicial
F function where the very nature of function involves the principle of natural
justice or in any case of an administrative function effecting the rights of an
individual. We are, therefore, of the view that on making of declaration under
Section 3 of the Act determining the territorial area of a Gram Sabha and
thereafter establishing a Gram Sabha for that area is an act legislative in
G character in the context of the provisions of the Act.
Once it is found that the power exercisable under Sections 3 and 4 of
the Act respectively is legislative in character, the question that arises is
whether the State Government, while exercising that power, the rule of natural
justice is required to be observed? It is almost settled law that an act legislative
H in character-primary or subordinate, is not subjected to rule of natural justice.
STATE OF PUNJAB v. TEHAL SINGH [V.N. KHARE, J.] 35

In case of legislative act of legislature, no question of application of rule of A
natural justice arises. However, in case of subordinate legislation, the legislature
may provide for observance of principle of natural justice or provide for
hearing to the resident of the area before making any declaration in regard

J
to the territorial area of a Gram Sabha and also before establishing a Gram
Sabha for that area. We have come across many enactments where an
opportunity of hearing has been provided for before any area is excluded from B
one Gram Sabha and included it in different Gram Sabhas or a local authority.
However, it depends upon the legislative wisdom and the provisions of an
enactment. Where the legislature has provided for giving an opportunity of
hearing before excluding an area from a Gram Sabha and including it in
another local authority or body, an opportunity of hearing is sine qua non C
and failure to give such an opportunity of hearing to the residents would
render the declaration invalid. But where the legislature in its wisdom has not
chosen to provide for any opportunity of hearing or observance of principle
of natural justice before issue of a declaration either under Section 3 or
Section 4 of the Act, the residents of the area cannot insist for giving an
opportunity· of hearing before the area where they are residing is included in D
another Gram Sabha or local authority. In Rameshchandra Kachardas Porwa/
and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra (supra), this court held as thus:

"In one of the Bihar cases it was further submitted that when a market
yard was disestablished at one place and established at another place, E
it was the duty of the concerned authority to invite and hear objections.
Failure to do so was a violation of the yard at one place and establishing
J.
it elsewhere was, therefore, bad. It was objections before a "market
area" was declared under the Act, so should objection be invited and
heard before a 'market yard' was established at any particular place.
The principles of natural justice demanded it. We are unable to agree. F
We are here not concerned with the exercise of a judicial or quasi-
judicial function where the very nature of the function involves the
application of the rules of natural justice, or of an administrative
function affecting the rights of persons, wherefore, a duty to act fairly.
We are concerned with legislative activity; we are concerned with the G
making of a legislative instrument, the declaration by notification of
the Government that a certain place shall be a principal market yard
for a market area, upon which declaration certain statutory provisions
at once spring into action and certain consequences prescribed by
statute follow forthwith. The making of the declaration, in the context,
is certainly an act legislative in character and does not oblige the H
36 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2002) I S.C.R.

A observance of the rules of natural justice."
In the present case, the provisions of the Act do not provide for any

c
opportunity of hearing to the residents before any area falling under a particular
Gram Sabha is excluded and included in another Gram Sabha. In the absence
of such a provision, the residents of that area which has been excluded and
B included in a different Gram Sabha cannot make a complaint regarding denial
of opportunity of hearing before issue of declarations under Sections 3 and
4 of the Act respectively. However, the position would be different where a
house of a particular resident of an area is sought to be excluded from the
existing Gram Sabha and included it in another Gram Sabha. There the action
of the Government being directed against an individual, the Government is
C required to observe principles of natural justice. For the aforesaid reasons, we
are of the view that no opportunity of hearing was required to be given before
making declaration either under Section 3 or Section 4 of the Act by the
Government.

Coming to the second question, the High Court had taken a view that
D since an opportunity of hearing was required to be given before issuing a
declaration under Section 3 of the Act, therefore, notifications under Section
3 and 4 could not have been issued simultaneously has to be held erroneous,
once we held that no opportunity of hearing was required to be given before
issue of declaration under Section 3 of the Act.
E So far as the third question is concerned, we have been shown the map
of villages Gram Sabha, Wazidpur and Khanpur and on its perusals we find
that Harijan Colony although not totally, but partially is contiguous to village
Khanp11r and, therefore, there was substantial compliance of the provision of
sub-section (i) of the Section 3 of the Act, and, therefore, the view taken by
F the High Court was erroneous.
For the reasons aforestated, this appeal deserves to be allowed. The
judgment under challenge is set aside. The appeal is allowed., there shall be
no order as to costs.
T.NA. Appeal allowed.