Civil Revision No.2701 of 2010 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 2701 of 2010 Date of decision: 4.5.2010 Dr. Vikram Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Sudhanshu Makker, Advocate for the petitioner. S.D.ANAND, J. The plaintiff-petitioner, a member of Gram Sabha of village Gujrani, had filed a suit for mandatory injunction for the issuance of a direction to the official respondents to hold an enquiry into the affairs of the Gram Panchayat of the village. The plea, in the context, was that the Gram Panchayat had, by some acts, caused social and financial loss to the plaintiff by resolving that plaintiff/petitioner be subjected to a social boycott. Along with the suit itself, the plaintiff also asked for the grant of ad-interim direction requiring the official respondents to dissolve the Gram Panchayat. Both the Courts (the learned Trial Court and also the learned First Appellate Court) negatived the plea raised by the plaintiff-petitioner. It is apparent, from a perusal of the record, that the relevant panchayat legislation takes care of the contingency wherein Civil Revision No.2701 of 2010 -2- **** affected party applies for dissolution of a Panchayat. The Act further provides for an Appellate Authority and a Revisional Authority. Thus, the Act itself containd in itself in the relevant behalf. There is plethora of law on the point that this Court, would in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, interfere only if the view adopted by the learned Trial Court and the learned Ist Appellate court is perverse in character which is not in the present case. In the light of foregoing discussion, the petition is held to be denuded of merit and is ordered to be dismissed. May 04, 2010 (S.D.Anand) Pka Judge