CWP No.2039 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.2039 of 2010 Date of decision: 15.2.2010 Baldev and another ...Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Ms. Sushma Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioners. Rajan Gupta, J. (oral) The petitioners have sought a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to decide the complaint filed against Gej Singh Panch, respondent No.4 herein. A further prayer has been made for stay of order dated 5th February, 2010, Annexure P-6. It has been averred in the writ petition that election of Nagar Panchayat Shahkot was held in May, 2008. In the election, seven Panches were elected. Respondent No.4 contested from the scheduled caste category. At the time of filing nomination papers, he gave a declaration that he never remained posted as Lambardar or Chowkidar and was not holding any government office. An objection was raised at that time that respondent No.4 was working with Food Corporation of India as handling labourer and thus was an employee of FCI. According to the petitioners, despite this objection the respondent No.4 was allowed to contest. One Kuldeep Singh later filed a complaint CWP No.2039 of 2010 2 alleging that respondent No.4 ought to be removed from the office of Panch, he being employee of FCI Shahkot. Since complaint was not considered by the official respondents, a writ petition (CWP No.19445 of 2009) was filed in this court wherein order dated 16th December, 2009, Annexure P-4, was passed directing respondent No.2 to consider the complaint and take appropriate decision as per law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the complaint of the petitioners is still pending and no decision has been taken thereon, thus, election to the post of Sarpanch be held in abeyance for the time being. Alternatively, she has prayed that the election be made subject to outcome of the decision of the complaint filed by the petitioners against respondent No.4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have given careful thought to the facts of the case. It is evident that there is no finding on record as on date that respondent No.4 is guilty of malpractice or misconduct. There is a mere allegation that he was working as a handling labourer with FCI on daily wages i.e. Rs.63/- per day and thus, an employee of a statutory body. On the basis of this allegation, a prayer has been made for stay of election to the post of Sarpanch. I find that the prayer is totally misconceived. Merely because some allegations have been levelled against respondent No.4, election to the post of Sarpanch, cannot be held in abeyance. The petitioners earlier filed CWP No.1220 of 2010, CWP No.2039 of 2010 3 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 25.1.2010. Shortly thereafter, the instant writ petition has been preferred. It appears that the petitioners wish to settle their political scores by repeatedly invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court. Normally, this would attract exemplary costs. However, keeping in view the fact that petitioners appear to be villagers, earning their livelihood from agriculture and labour work, this court is refraining from doing so. The petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE February 15, 2010 'rajpal'