✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 04 Aug 2008

Charanjit Kaur v. State of Punjab & Ors.

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P No. 13651 of 2008SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, DAYA CHAUDHARY

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Judgment

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr. G.S. Singpuria, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioner, who has been elected as Panch of Gram Panchayat, Village Kot Lalu, Tehsil and District Mansa, has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuing directions to respondents No.2 and 3 to hold the election of Sarpanch in accordance with the provisions of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 which has not been conducted so far and the meeting called for the said purpose was adjourned thrice, without any justification. It is the case of the petitioner that till date, the election of Sarpanch has not been held. Notice of motion. On our asking, Mr. K.S. Dadwal, Additional Advocate General, CWP No. 13651 of 2008 -2- Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. 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 respondents No.2 and 3 that if the election of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Village Kot Lalu, Tehsil and District Mansa has not been held so far, the same be conducted within a period of ten days, 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 and not in the office of the BDPO. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the petitioner, under the signatures of the Bench Secretary. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE August 04, 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 04 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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P No. 13651 of 2008). ← Search more judgments