Kamaldeep Singh v. State Of Punjab And ORS
CWP No.9871 of 2017 {1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.9871 of 2017 Date of decision:10.05.2017 Kamaldeep Singh ... Petitioner Vs.
State of Punjab and others ... Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present:- Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral) Notice of motion.
Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the caveator/respondent.
The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 06.03.2017 (Annexure P-11). Mr. Nakul Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his appeal against the suspension order as Sarpanch had been dismissed without passing any reasoned order. The impugned order dated 06.03.2017 reads as under:- "Today on 06.03.2017, ADC(D) Sangrur and BDPO Sunan both present. They submitted the enquiry report charges have been proved partially. DRDP to examine reports of ADC(D) and BDPO and take action as per law. Stay orders dated 07.11.2016 stands vacated. Disposed off."
Savita 2017.05.11 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
CWP No.9871 of 2017 {2} On perusal of the aforementioned order, it is revealed that during the pendency of the matter qua suspension, the regular inquiry has culminated into final in which charges have been proved partially. In my view, question of suspension as per the aforementioned inquiry is over and the petitioner shall be served a show cause notice under Section 24 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and he shall be at liberty to take all possible pleas which have been taken in the present writ petition in the contemplated show cause notice.
In view of the aforementioned fact, no ground is made out for interference in the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE May 10, 2017 savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Savita 2017.05.11 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh