IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 11458 of 2009 Date of Decision: 3.8.2009. Surjit Singh --Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion to respondents no.1 to 4 only. Mr. P.C. Goyal, Addl. A.G., Punjab has been asked to accept notice on behalf of the respondents-State. The petitioner has challenged the election of respondent no.6 for the post of Sarpanch on the ground that one of the Panch-respondent no.5 later resigned from the post of Panch and respondent no.6 had won with the vote of respondent no.5 and thus after the resignation of respondent no.5, his election becomes illegal. Such a plea is totally baseless. When the election of respondent no.6 was held, respondent no.5 was a duly elected Panch, though, he resigned subsequently. On that basis, election of respondent no.6 does not become illegal and invalid. Be that as it may. If the petitioner has any other ground to challenge the election of respondent no.6, he is at liberty to file an election petition. The other prayer is to fill up the resultant vacancy on account of resignation of respondent no.5. CWP. No. 11458 of 2009 -2- So far, this prayer is concerned, there is substance in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. Under the given circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to fill up the post of Panch, lying vacant in accordance with rules, as expeditiously as possible. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 3.8.2009 lucky