Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

P&H HC Directs Gram Panchayat to Construct Road for Emergency Medical Aid; Frivolous Petition Costs Imposed on Sarpanch

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh has directed a Gram Panchayat to construct a road for emergency medical aid, emphasizing the constitutional obligation to provide convenient access to medical facilities. The court dismissed a writ petition filed by Gram Panchayat Badaliyan, challenging the construction of the road for an unauthorized occupant. The judgment was delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari.

The petitioner argued that the road construction, directed by the Collector of the revenue district, was intended solely for the personal benefit of the unauthorized occupant, respondent No. 9. The Gram Panchayat contended that the road should benefit the entire village and had passed a resolution opposing the construction.

Addressing the arguments, the court stated that the Gram Panchayat had a constitutional duty to provide road access for emergency medical aid to the villagers. It emphasized that the right to life, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, encompassed the duty of the State to ensure convenient access, including ambulance roads, for medical emergencies.

The court held that even if the road construction primarily benefited a single individual, it did not provide sufficient grounds for the Gram Panchayat to resist the Collector's directions. It noted that providing road access to every villager, including a solitary homestead, was essential to fulfill the right to life. This would enable timely medical care by facilitating ambulance services to reach any citizen in need.

Dismissing the writ petition, the court deemed it frivolous and possibly motivated by malafides. It imposed costs of Rs. 50,000 on the Sarpanch (head) of Gram Panchayat Badaliyan, who filed the petition. The Sarpanch was directed to deposit the costs with the Treasurer of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association.

This judgment serves as a significant reminder of the constitutional duty to prioritize the right to life and ensure accessibility to essential services, particularly in emergency situations. The court's decision underscores the obligation of Gram Panchayats to provide roads for emergency medical aid and discourages the filing of frivolous petitions, emphasizing the potential consequences for those involved.

Date of Decision : May 08, 2023

GRAM PANCHAYAT BADALIYAN vs THE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER TO GOVT. PUNJAB AND ORS.

 

Latest Legal News