Civil Writ Petition No.103 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:- 5.1.2011 Balwinder Singh son of Gurnam Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Gurbir Singh Toor, Advocate for the petitioner. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J. (Oral) The conspectus of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, is that respondent No.5 Hardev Singh son of Satwant Singh was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Khudi Kalan, Tehsil and District Barnala. In the wake of No Confidence Motion, he was removed from the post of Sarpanch without giving him seven days' clear notice and petitioner Balwinder Singh was appointed as Sarpanch, vide resolution dated 26.10.2010 (Annexure P2). Respondent No.5 challenged the action of the respondents by virtue of Civil Writ Petition No.22815 of 2010, which came to be disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.), vide order dated 21.12.2010 (Annexure P1), the operative part of which is as under:- “Counsel for the State has submitted that the State of Punjab has issued an ordinance, called “Punjab Panchayati Raj Amendment Ordinance, 2010 on 14th December, 2010, whereby Section 19 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which prescribed removal of a Sarpanch by passing a resolution by 2/3rd majority of the members of Gram Panchayat has been omitted. Counsel for the State has further submitted that in case of pursuance of the resolution (Annexure P-5) no notification has been issued to de-notify the election the petitioner Sarpanch shall continue to remain in the office. Civil Writ Petition No.103 of 2011 2 Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the statement made by counsel for the State, present writ petition has been rendered infructuous and the same be dismissed as such. Ordered accordingly.” 2. Now the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition to restrain respondent Nos.1 to 4 from removing him from the post of Sarpanch in the garb of order (Annexure P1), invoking the provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, after going through the record with his valuable help and considering the matter deeply, to my mind, there is no merit in the present writ petition. 4. What is not disputed here is that Section 19 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 prescribing the removal of Sarpanch by passing resolution of No Confidence Motion, has already been omitted by the State Govt. As no notification has been issued to de-notify the election of respondent No.5, therefore, he will be deemed to continue as Sarpanch of the village in view of order (Annexure P1) of this Court in this context. In this manner, petitioner has no legitimate claim on the office of Sarpanch of the village. 5. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant writ petition is hereby dismissed in the obtaining circumstances of the case. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) 5.1.2011 Judge AS