MOHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The contour of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the sole controversy, involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that in the wake of general Gram Panchayat elections, Dalip Singh (respondent No. 4) was duly elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Jaimal Singh Wala, Block Sahina, District Barnala, in view of the provisions of The Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act"). The petitioner and other Panches moved an application to Block Development & Panchayat Officer (for short "the BDPO") for convening a meeting to consider the resolution of 'No Confidence Motion' against the Sarpanch, as contemplated under section 19 of the Act. Consequently, a meeting was convened and resolution of 'No Confidence Motion' was passed against respondent No. 4 on 27.9.2010. The petitioner was stated to have been authorised to act as Sarpanch.

(2.) During the pendency of 'No Confidence Motion' proceedings, the Governor of Punjab issued Punjab Ordinance No. 9 of 2010, by virtue of notification dated 14.12.2010 (Annexure P3). Ultimately, the Punjab Legislative Assembly amended the Act, by way of The Punjab Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act, 2011 (Annexure P4) and section 19 of the Act dealing with the no-confidence motion, was omitted.

(3.) As the name of respondent No. 4 was not de-notified and no fresh regular election for the post of Sarpanch was held till 14.12.2010, therefore, he was reinstated on the indicated post of Sarpanch. Consequently, the BDPO directed the authorised Panch (petitioner) to hand over the charge of Gram Panchayat to the elected Sarpanch (respondent No. 4), by means of impugned letter dated 24.1.2011 (Annexure P5).