K. Kannan, J. - (1.) THE petition seeks for quashing of an order passed by the 1st respondent on 02.05.2008, considering the representation of the petitioner seeking for establishment of a separate Gram Panchayat for Village Machhi Joya after excluding the same from Gram Panchayat Mulakala. The order came to be passed on previous direction issued by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 6211 of 2008 to consider the representation of the petitioners. The representation was on the basis of report given by the District Development and Panchayat Officer, Kapurthala stating that the population of Machhi Joya was 614 and the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Sultanpur Lodhi had also stated that as per the official records, though no separate census report regarding the Village Machhi Joya was made, it was constituted in Ward No. 1 of the Municipal Council of Sultanpur Lodhi and as per the official records, Ward No. 1 comprised of 490 Males and 406 females and the total population was 896. This was the basis for the contention of the petitioner to state that the Village Machhi Joya was required to be notified as a separate village panchayat.
(2.) ON a statement filed by the 1st respondent denying the population statistics as given in the report of the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Sultanpur Lodhi and the BDPO, Sultanpur Lodhi, this Court had called upon an additional affidavit to be filed by the Director, Rural Development and Panchayats. He has reaffirmed the statistics which were to be the basis for formation of panchayats, with reference to the provisions of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, was the "population" as defined under Section 2(zn) and it shall be a rural population as ascertained in the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published. Along with the affidavit, he has given the published information of the census of India, 2001 referring to Machhi Joya as comprising of a population of 100. The Act sets out the basis for establishment of Gram Sabhas and Gram Panchayats in Section 3 and it shall not be possible for a Court to look beyond how an establishment of Gram Panchayat could be made. If the population as required in the census shall be taken as relevant for establishment of a village panchayat, it shall not be possible to discard the census report and go by what the Executive Officer states through a certificate or what a Block Development Officer enters in a proforma prescribed. The learned Counsel is unable to state on what basis the pro -forma is filled up, which has been filed along with the writ petition or for what purpose the details in the proforma have been collected. The purpose again becomes relevant for it shall be only used for the purpose for which the data could be used. There is really no authenticity to the datas shown in the Block Development Officer's report or the Executive Officer's letter dated 13.01.2008. It is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the State that on the basis of the population statistics and the constitution of the panchayats, election has also been held and all the villages of Machhi Joya have participated as members of the Panchayat in Mulakala. The writ petitions seeking for relief of constitution of a Gram Panchayat cannot be a matter of a judicial function at all. It shall be done only under the provisions of Act by authorities constituted under the Act and if a decision has been taken by the 1st respondent on due verification of the official records which he is bound to verify, there shall be no occasion for Court's intervention. The writ petition is dismissed.;