Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

High court restrains Punjab Mandi Board from construction on 22 acres of land in Patiala

Panchayat of Mehmadpur, in its petition, alleged that it is seeking the intervention of the court against the illegal acquisition and commercial exploitation of village common land

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed Punjab Mandi Board not to make any construction on 22 acres (96 bighas) of land in village Mehmadpur, tehsil and district Patiala, until the next date of hearing of the case. The order was passed on a petition filed by Panchayat of Mehmadpur.

Advertisement

The panchayat, in its petition, alleged that it is seeking the intervention of the court against the illegal acquisition and commercial exploitation of village common land by Punjab Mandi Board, in gross violation of constitutional, statutory, and defence regulations. The petitioner panchayat is the lawful custodian of approximately 22 acres (96 bighas) of village common land in Mehmadpur.

Advertisement

Despite statutory prohibition and repeated objections from the panchayat and Department of Town and Country Planning, Punjab Mandi Board allegedly induced the petitioner panchayat to transfer the land under the garb of “development” for establishing a vegetable market. The Board represented that two-thirds of the shops developed thereon would be allotted to the village community free of cost.

Misled by such representations, the panchayat passed resolutions on February 9, 2024, July 13, 2024, April 9, 2025, and May 21, 2025, granting the land for the above limited purpose. However, immediately thereafter, the Board allegedly diverted the use of land for commercial construction, encroached upon public approach roads connecting adjoining villages (Barsat, Kishangarh, and Chuharpur), and initiated e-auction of the proposed shops, thereby attempting to usurp the panchayat property worth over Rs 50 crore for private and political gain.

The land falls within 1,000 yards of Army Ammunition Depot, Patiala, making any construction violative of the Works of Defence Act, 1903, and notification dated January 16, 2006, and subsequent general public notice dated September 4, 2023, which strictly prohibit any construction or raising of even a tree in such restricted zones.

Advertisement

Alarmed by this breach of trust, the petitioner convened a Gram Sabha, where over 270 villagers unanimously resolved on September 15, 2025, to cancel all earlier resolutions and reclaim the panchayat land. The Block Development and Panchayat Officer (BDPO), Patiala, accordingly wrote to the District Development and Panchayat Officer (DDPO) on October 15, 2025, recommending restoration of land to the panchayat, as the proposed Mandi project was impermissible within the defence restricted zone.

Department of Town Planning had already, vide letters dated August 19, 2024, and September 18, 2024, categorically declared that the proposed construction fell within the prohibited area and was contrary to the defence notification of 2006. Despite these official communications, the Board, in connivance with the Deputy Commissioner, Patiala, allegedly continues with illegal construction, violating statutory safeguards and fundamental rights of the Gram Panchayat, Mehmadpur.

After hearing the arguments, Justices Deepak Sibal and Lapita Banerji said, “The counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that even though the petitioner-panchayat has cancelled the resolutions transferring the land in question to Punjab Mandi Board, and the State of Punjab has written to the Board not to raise any construction on the land, as part of such land is within 1,000 yards of the existing ammunition dump, the respondent-Board is continuing with its construction.”

Advertisement
Tags :
#LandControversy#MehmadpurLand#PatialaNews#PunjabLandDispute#PunjabMandiBoard#VillagePanchayatHighCourtOrderIllegalConstructionlandacquisitionWorksOfDefenceAct
Show comments
Advertisement