IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 13818 of 2009 Date of Decision:4.9.2009. Gurmukh Singh and others --Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. C.L. Premy, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) The petitioners have challenged the order dated 13.7.2009 passed by respondent no.1, reinstating respondent no.3 to the post of Sarpanch. Earlier, on the complaint made by the petitioners, Director Rural Development & Panchayat, Punjab vide his order dated 2.7.2009 suspended respondent no.3, who preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority has set aside the order of suspension, passed by the Director, Rural Development & Panchayat and ordered reinstatement of respondent no.3 to the post of Sarpanch. The Appellate Authority has categorically recorded that respondent no.3 was not in possession of the Panchayat land. As a matter of fact the father-in-law of respondent no3 was in possession, who also vacated the land and the Panchayat has already taken over the said land. Not only that, some civil suit, filed by the father- in-law of respondent no.3 has also been withdrawn. In view of the above clear findings of fact, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. It cannot be lost sight that respondent no.3 cannot be punished for the wrong acts of her father-in-law. No merit, petition dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 4.9.2009 lucky