IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. CWP. No. 13677 of 2009 Date of Decision: 3.9.2009 Sukhwinder Singh --Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others --Respondents 2. CWP. No. 13678 of 2009 Kashmir Singh --Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. B.S. Baath, Advocate for the petitioners. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. P.C. Goyal, Addl. A.G., Punjab has been asked to accept notice on behalf of the respondents-State. The petitioners in these two writ petitions are Panchs. They were suspended vide order dated 18.6.2009 on the basis of an inquiry said to be conducted by the DDPO, Gurdaspur and recommended for initiation of disciplinary proceedings. The only charge against the petitioners was that they remained absent from the Panchayat meetings and did not permit the Panchayat to carry out the development works. On that basis show cause notices were issued to the petitioners and even dates for personal hearing were fixed. However, it is not apparent from the orders of suspension whether the petitioners were allowed personal hearing or not. Director, Rural Development & Panchayat Department passed the order of suspension, referred to above. Petitioners preferred separate appeals before CWP. No. 13677 of 2009 -2- the Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Punjab Rural Development & Panchayat Department. Both the appeals have been allowed by the Appellate Authority holding that the orders of suspension were in violation of principles of natural justice and remanded the matter back to the Director, Rural Development & Panchayat. However, while remanding the case the Appellate Authority maintained the order of suspension. The petitioners have filed these writ petitions challenging the aforesaid two orders. I have perused the impugned orders and heard learned counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the nature of controversy, these writ petitions are disposed of at the motion stage itself with the consent of learned counsel for the parties. Since the Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that the order of suspension was in violation of principles of natural justice and remanded the case, it should have set aside the suspension order as well. Keeping in view the order of Appellate Authority and the totality of the circumstances including the allegations against the petitioners, these writ petitions are disposed of in the following manner: 1. The order of remand passed by the Appellate Authority is upheld only to the extent of remanding of the case. 2. The order of suspension dated 18.6.2009 shall remain in abeyance till the matter is finally decided by the Director, Rural Development & Panchayat Department. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 3.9.2009 lucky