TEJBALKAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the order dated 6.5.2010 passed by the learned Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, and affirmed by the learned appellate authority, vide which the Petitioner has been ordered to be suspended from the post of panch on account of his involvement in a criminal case under Sections 307, 324, 341 and 348 IPC.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioner contends, that in terms of Section 20(3) of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, an offence involving moral turpitude or which is likely to cause embarrassment to the panch/sarpanch in performance of duty, can only be the basis for suspension of panch/sarpanch and not otherwise.

(3.) It is also the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the word "may" used in Section 20(3) of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, envisages that it is for the Director to form an opinion before ordering suspension, that the criminal case registered against the party is likely to cause embarrassment, to the person. This can only be done, after the party has been given an opportunity of hearing.