IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 15407 of 2011 Date of Decision: 23.08.2011 Ranjit Singh ..Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present: Mr. N.P.S. Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner. 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? ALOK SINGH J. (ORAL) Record reveals that petitioner was placed under suspension by the Director vide order dated 08.07.2011 under Section 20(4) of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the basis of preliminary enquiry report after issuing show cause notice and considering the reply to the show cause notice on the ground that Panches have complained that petitioner being Panch has forged signatures of the Panch on the resolution. Order dated 08.07.2011 has been upheld by respondent No.1 vide order dated 08.08.2011. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that although FIR was also registered against the petitioner on 28.10.2010, however, till date, police has not completed investigation and no challan could be filed before the Competent Magistrate. He has further stated that since petitioner was placed under suspension by invoking Sub-Section 4 of Section 20 of the Act, therefore, petitioner cannot be kept under suspension for indefinite period without any regular enquiry. He has correctly stated that petitioner can be placed under suspension under sub-section 4 of Section 20 of the Act only during enquiry. The apprehension of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that officers shall not hold any enquiry and shall keep the petitioner under suspension for the indefinite period. Civil Writ Petition No. 15407 of 2011 -2- I find some force in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sarpanch/Panch can be placed under suspension by invoking sub-section 4 of Section 20 during the pendency of the enquiry for the alleged misconduct committed by him. If in the enquiry, petitioner is found to be guilty of misconduct, he can be removed from the post of Sarpanch/Panch, as the case may be, under Section 20(1)(e) of the Act. However, if petitioner is not found guilty for the alleged misconduct, there is no question of keeping the petitioner under suspension for the indefinite period. In the interest of justice and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, keeping in mind the serious allegation that petitioner has forged signatures on the alleged resolution, in the opinion of this Court, petition can be disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to hold and conclude the enquiry within reasonable time so that petitioner may not be kept under suspension for indefinite period. Present petition is disposed of with direction to respondent No.2 to initiate and hold the enquiry against the petitioner for the alleged misconduct and to conclude the same in accordance with law after affording opportunity to the petitioner, preferably within four months from the date certified copy of the order is placed before him. It goes without saying that if petitioner is not found guilty for the alleged misconduct, suspension order will go. However, if enquiry is not concluded within four months as directed by this Court, impugned orders shall be deemed to have been set aside. (ALOK SINGH) JUDGE 23.08.2011 som