CWP No. 9774 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 9774 of 2009 Date of Decision: 15.07.2009 Shyam Singh Lambardar ..Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S.THAKUR,CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : Mr. Harish Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner ***** T.S.Thakur, C.J. (Oral) This petition has been filed in public interest. It prays for a mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 3 to remove respondents No.4 and 5 from the posts of Panch because of their involvement in a criminal case registered at Police Station Sadar Ludhiana for offences punishable under Sections 415, 416, 419, 420, 465, 467, 120-B of Indian Penal Code in FIR No. 344 dated 30.09.2003. CWP No. 9774 of 2009 [2] The petitioner's case appears to be that although he has in terms of a legal notice dated 06.03.2009 addressed to among others Director, Panchayat and Development, Punjab prayed for action against respondents No. 4 and 5 under Section 20(3) of Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and even when the Director is competent to pass an appropriate order suspending a Sarpanch or Panch under the said provision, the Director has not passed any order on the subject matter. Mr. Khosla, learned Addl. Advocate General, Punjab who appeared on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 submitted that if the petitioner limited his prayer only to the passing of an order by respondent no.3, there shall be no need to issue notice to respondents No.4 and 5 nor would be any difficulty in disposing of this petition at this stage itself. He urged that in terms of Section 20(3) of Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, the Director is no doubt competent to make an order in an appropriate case and that the Director in the present case would have no difficulty in passing an appropriate order in accordance with the said provision on the notice sent by the petitioner. In the circumstances, therefore, and keeping in view the innocuous order that we are making, we consider it unnecessary to issue notice to respondents No. 4 and 5. Since a request for action under Section 20(3) of Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 has been made before the Director by reference to a case registered in Police Station Sadar at Ludhiana, in which respondents No. 4 and 5 are alleged to be involved, we see no reason why the Director should not examine the said aspect, verify the facts and pass an appropriate order on the subject after hearing respondents No. 4 and 5. CWP No. 9774 of 2009 [3] We accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.2, Director, Panchayat and Development, Punjab to examine the request made by the petitioner in his notice dated 06.03.2009 marked as Annexure P-7 to the writ petition, verify the facts and pass an appropriate order in regard to the same after affording to the petitioner and respondents No.4 and 5 an opportunity of being heard in the matter. Needful shall be done by the Director expeditiously but not later than three months from today. A copy of the order shall then be endorsed to the petitioner also for such action as he may like to take in accordance with law. A copy of this order shall be given dasti to Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Addl. A.G. Punjab for compliance under the signature of the Bench Secretary. (T.S.THAKUR) CHIEF JUSTICE (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) JUDGE 15.07.2009 'ravinder'