Vijay Lakshmi And Anothers v. State Of Punjab And Others

the meetings convened by the Sarpanch nor supporting the developmental works of the village. It is further submitted that due intimation regarding the various meetings was duly forwarded to the learned District Development and Panchayat Officer, Gurdaspur, however, no action has been taken by the said authority. Rather, the petitioners have been served with a Show Cause Notice (Annexure P-6) indicating that since the Gram Panchayat, Village Niamta, Block Dorangala, District Gurdaspur, has failed to utilize a grant amounting to Rs.4,54,477/- towards developmental works in the village, accordingly, proceedings under Section 200 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, would be initiated for appointment of an Administrator of the Gram Panchayat in case the works are not commenced. 2.1 3.

At this stage, Mr. Nirmaljit Singh Diwana, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, and Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Advocate, appear on behalf of the respondent-State and respondents No.6 to 9, respectively, in pursuance of the advance copies of paper book having already been supplied to them. Power of Attorney filed by Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Advocate, in Court today, is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. 4.

Learned State counsel submits that before taking any action with regard to the appointment of an Administrator of Gram Panchayat, Village Niamta, Block Dorangala, District Gurdaspur, the response (Annexure P-7) submitted by the petitioners shall be duly considered by the

learned District Development and Panchayat Officer, Gurdaspur, and an appropriate speaking order shall be passed thereon, in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties. 5.

Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions made by learned State counsel, no further orders are required to be passed in the present writ petition and the same is, accordingly, disposed of.