Maninderjit Kaur & Ors. v. The State of Punjab & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994
Judgment
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr. R.S. Pandher, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. N.S. Virk, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 5. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioners, who have been elected as Panches of Gram Panchayat, Village Khuddian Gulab Singh, Tehsil Malout, District Muktsar, have filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuing directions to respondents No.2 and 5 to ensure free and fair election of Sarpanch in accordance with the provisions of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which has not been conducted so far. It is case of the petitioners that on 15.7.2008, election of Sarpanch was postponed by the Presiding Officer due to lack of quorum to CWP No. 12746 of 2008 -2-
17.7.2008. On 17.7.2008, again the election was postponed without giving any new date. Counsel for the petitioners has stated at bar that till date, no meeting for electing the Sarpanch has been convened. We have heard counsel for the parties. In a similar case i.e. CWP No. 12694 of 2008, titled as Gurmeet Singh versus State of Punjab and others, decided on July 23, 2008, this Court has issued general directions to conduct the election of the Sarpanch in accordance with the provisions of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. Keeping in view the said direction, we dispose of this petition with a direction to respondent No.2 that if the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Village Khuddian Gulab Singh, Tehsil Malout, District Muktsar, has not been held so far, the same be conducted within a period of seven days, after giving three days' prior notice to all the Panches, in accordance with the directions, already given by this Court in CWP No. 12694 of 2008. It is further directed that election of the Sarpanch will be held in the Village itself. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties under the signatures of the Bench Secretary. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE August 06, 2008 ( DAYA CHAUDHARY ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 06 Aug 2008. The bench was SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, DAYA CHAUDHARY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.