BALWANT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners through the present writ petition have prayed that a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued for quashing the order dated August 30, 1999 (annexure P3), passed by respondent No. 2, vide which respondent No. 5 has been ordered to be reinstated as Sarpanch.

(2.) Briefly, the facts are that the petitioners filed a complaint against respondent No.5, who is an elected Sarpanch of village Harion Kalan, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana, on the ground that he had misutilised the grants given by the Government under the Indira Awaas Yojna, for the construction of pucca houses for the persons living in Kacha houses. It was pointed out that the Sarpanch (respondent No.5) constructed a drawing room in his house out of the grant given to one Bakhshish Singh alias Bakhshi Singh. It was further pointed out that by giving the grant to Smt. Paramjit Kaur, married daughter of Surmukh Singh deceased, instead of his widow Smt. Jaswant Kaur, respondent No.5 had misutiiised his position. Respondent No.2, before whom the complaint was lodged, forwarded the same to the District Development & Panchayat Officer, Ludhiana, respondent No.4, for holding preliminary inquiry into the matter. The District Development & Panchayat Officer held that respondent No.5 is responsible for getting wrong grants released and spending the same under the Indira Vikas Scheme. In this way, the Sarpanch has misused his post." Accordingly, it was recommended that action be taken against respondent No.5. Thereafter, regular inquiry was conducted by the Divisional Deputy Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, Patiala, respondent No. 3, who also recommended that action be taken against respondent No.5. The case was finally decided by respondent No.2, who after considering the reply of the Sarpanch, held that the allegations levelled against respondent No.5 were baseless and exonerated him of all the charges. A copy of the order passed by respondent No.2 has been placed on record as Annexure P3. It is against this order that the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.

(3.) A written statement controverting the allegations made in the writ petition has been filed by the respondent No.5.