Nirmal Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ORS

-1CWP No.6681 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.6681 of 2016 Date of decision: 08.04.2016 Nirmal Singh and another ....Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH DHALIWAL 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: - Mr. H.S. Aujla, Advocate, for the petitioners. PARAMJEET SINGH DHALIWAL, J. (ORAL) Instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondents to pass a speaking order on the complaint of the petitioners against respondent No.5 and for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 23.12.2015 (Annexure P-3).

Brief facts of the case are that the residents of Village Bulari Kalan filed a complaint against respondent No.5 - Sukhwinder Kaur, Ex-Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bulari Kalan before the Additional Deputy Commissioner on the ground that respondent No.5 had embezzled huge amount of grants sanctioned for the development of the Village. The said complaint has been dismissed vide order dated RAVINDER SINGH 2016.04.12 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

-2CWP No.6681 of 2016 23.12.2015 (Annexure P-3). Hence, this writ petition. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that before passing the impugned order, proper inquiry has not been held, therefore, impugned order deserves to be quashed.

I have considered the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioners.

The impugned order has been passed by the authorities after considering the report of the Executive Engineer, Panchayati Raj. The authorities have come to the conclusion that no loss has been caused to the State exchequer and nothing is due from respondent No.5. In view of above, no ground is made out for interference with the impugned order by this Court.

Dismissed. However, petitioners will be at liberty to approach the concerned authorities in accordance with law. (Paramjeet Singh Dhaliwal) Judge April 08, 2016 R.S.

RAVINDER SINGH 2016.04.12 17:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document