IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.3248 of 2009 Date of Decision: March 03, 2009 Sarabjit Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. K.S. Boparai, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This civil writ petition has been filed by petitioner, Sarabjit Singh, Ex-Sarpanch, village Kotli Lehal, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur, with a prayer for quashing Order dated 11.2.2009 (Annexure P-4). Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court towards Annexure P-3 to contend that enquiry has already been held and therefore, a second enquiry just after 1½ months is not called for and is rather illegal. I have considered the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. Annexure P-3 is a report dated 19.12.2008 by Block Development & Panchayat Officer, CWP No.3248 of 2009 [2] Shri Hargobindpur, wherein it has been said that enquiry was conducted in regard to the works got done by the petitioner. During enquiry, no amount against Ex-Sarpanch is found to be recoverable. On perusal of the report, however, I find that material that formed the basis of the proceedings has not been mentioned in the enquiry report. It is a non-speaking order. As against this, Annexure P-4 is a letter written by the Sub Divisional Officer, Panchayati Raj, Sub Division, Gurdaspur to the Block Development & Panchayat Officer, Shri Hargobindpur. It has been stated in Annexure P-4 that whole record of the works got done by the petitioner i.e. voucher files, account books under signatures be sent to the Office so that enquiry can be conducted on the basis of the record and report be submitted. In view of the above, I do not find that any illegality has been caused. There is no reason for judicial review of order, Annexure P-4. The Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur, shall however ensure that on account of party faction, the petitioner is not harassed and enquiry is conducted in a fair manner. The petition is dismissed with the above observation. (AJAI LAMBA) March 03, 2009 JUDGE avin