IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 377 of 2008 Date of decision : January 11, 2008 Subhash Tyagi ....... Petitioner Versus Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana and Others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SARON. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY. Present: Mr. V.K. Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ashok Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioner. S.S. SARON, J. (ORAL) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking quashing of the orders dated 02.01.2008 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon (respondent No.2) and dated 07.01.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Financial Commissioner-cum- Principal Secretary to Government Haryana, Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh (respondent No.3). In terms of the order dated 02.01.2008 (Annexure P-2), the Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon (respondent No.2) placed the petitioner under suspension. It was inter alia observed on the basis of the report of the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sohna (respondent No.3) and after visit to the site that the land of the Gram Panchayat, which had been leased out by the petitioner was being used for commercial purposes and was in the CWP No. 377 of 2008 [2] possession of a Company. The petitioner aggrieved against the said order suspending him approached the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh (respondent No.1) in which the notice has been issued for 22.01.2008 and it has been observed that the application for stay shall be decided on giving of notice keeping in view the facts of the case. Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order placing the petitioner under suspension is illegal besides being devoid of any merit inasmuch as the principles of natural justice have not been complied with. A reference has been made to three Division Bench judgments of this Court in i) Om Parkash Sarpanch v. Deputy Commissioner, Sirsa, 2001 (3) RCR (Civil) 628 (ii) Hazari Lal, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Harsana Kalan, Distt. Sonepat v. The Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh, 2003 (3) PLR 596 and (iii) Jagtar Singh v. State of Haryana and another, 2004 (1) PLR 368 . It is strenuously contended that a Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat is an elected representative of the local bodies and an order placing him under suspension without hearing is a material irregularity and illegality, which per se vitiates the impugned order and therefore, the impugned order of the Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon suspending the petitioner from the office of Sarpanch is liable to be quashed even though, an appeal against the same is pending before the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh. In any case it is submitted that the operation of the same is liable to be suspended till the matter is disposed of by the appellate authority. CWP No. 377 of 2008 [3] We have given thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioner. However, we are unable to accept the same. It is no doubt that it is fundamental rule of law that no decision must be taken which would affect the rights of any person without giving him an opportunity of putting forward his case. However, it may be noticed that the present is a case where an appeal is still pending before the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh and notice has also been issued on the application for stay for 22.01.2008. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter is pending before a statutory authority who is competent to hear the appeal, it would be improper at this stage to interfere in the matter. Even otherwise in certain cases like a case of admitted and undisputed facts and no prejudice being shown, the violation of the rule per se would not warrant the invalidation of an administrative order. Besides, the matter can even be remitted to the stage at which the fault was pointed out. This, however, is for the appellate authority to consider and it would be premature for this Court to go into the these aspects at this stage. The petitioner may, therefore, pursue his remedy before the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh where his appeal is pending. The procedure prescribed for hearing the appeal is not liable to be short circuited or circumvented by ready-resort to a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India which is supervisory jurisdiction of this court. It has been noticed in the order of the learned Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh that the competent authority has passed an order after visiting the village and to stop the commercialization and mis-utilization of Panchayat CWP No. 377 of 2008 [4] land. Therefore, in the first instance, the Financial Commissioner-cum- Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh has considered it just and proper to hear the other side before considering the matter regarding stay. We find nothing un-reasonable in the said course adopted by the learned Financial Commissioner-cum- Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh and even otherwise, the matter is now listed for hearing on 22.01.2008. Learned Sr. counsel then contends that in terms of the impugned order dated 02.01.2008 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Gurgaon, the petitioner has been directed to hand over the records of the Panchayat and other movable and immovable property to a Panch having majority in the Panchayat. It is submitted that in case the record is handed over, the charge would also pass on to another person who has no right to function as a Sarpanch and this is likely to create third party rights. We find the said submission of the learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner to be of some relevance, however, that per se would not warrant interference of this Court. In any case, a remedial order can be passed that till the adjourned date of hearing i.e. 22.01.2008, the petitioner may not hand over the record of the Panchayat and other movable and immovable property to the Panch having majority in the Panchayat in terms of the order dated 2.01.2008. Accordingly, the civil writ petition is dismissed. However, till the next date of hearing i.e. 22.01.2008 before the Financial Commissioner-cum- Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh, the petitioner may not hand over the record of the Panchayat and other movable and immovable property to the Panch having majority in the Panchayat and this matter shall be considered by the Financial CWP No. 377 of 2008 [5] Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh. It is also made clear that nothing stated or expressed herein shall be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the learned Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary to Government Haryana Development and Panchayats Department, Chandigarh shall consider and decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law uninfluenced by any observations made herein. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE January 11, 2008 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) amit JUDGE