IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.7076 of 2009 Date of Decision: May 11, 2009 Ajit Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. C.L. Premy, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. V.K. Sandhir, Advocate, for caveator-respondent Nos.3 and 4. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) Challenge in this civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is to Order dated 17.3.2009 (Annexure P-22) and Order dated 20.4.2009 (Annexure P-24). Prayer has also been made for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to take disciplinary action against respondent No.7 i.e. Tehsildar, Samrala, District Ludhiana, for preparing false demarcation reports, Annexure P-3 and P-15, respectively. On a pointed query of the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to dispute the fact that the petitioner was CWP No.7076 of 2009 [2] associated not only in the proceedings of demarcation, but also during the regular enquiry. The findings recorded during regular enquiry are to the effect that the petitioner being a Panch was in unauthorised possession of the Panchayat land. Relevant portion of Annexure P-22, impugned order, reads as under:- “As per section 208 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 if any member is unauthorized occupant on the property of any local authority, he can not remain member. Due to unauthorized occupation of said panches on panchayat land, they are not eligible to remain in the office of panches. As per report of the Divisional Deputy Director, Patiala Ajit Singh, Panch has done unauthorized possession in app; 0-18 M in khasra no. 153. This land is infront of the house of Ajit Singh which he has constructed boundary wall on (0-2) marla and in the remaining 0-6 marlas, a khurli has been xxxx and fixed killas. In addition to this khasra no. 154, has put up pathi and staked parli in 0-2 m. As per revenue record Khasra no. 153 & 154 is panchayat deh and ownership is of grant panchayat. People are using these numbers. In Kharsa no. 39//2-13 possession over 20’x90’ 0-7 m approximately of Kiran Bala Panch has been shown in the demarcation report. This possession has been done by constructing room and boundary wall. As per report of the enquiry officer, allegations against the panches of unauthorized possession is proved fully. Due to serious allegations against the panches, it is not in the public/ panchayat interest to continue the panches in their offices.” The findings have been confirmed in the other impugned order, Annexure P-24, by the Financial Commisisoner & Secretary, Punjab Government, Rural Development & Panchayat Department, Punjab, exercising the powers of Government under the Punjab Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, before whom the petitioner had brought an appeal. Having regard to the fact that the impugned orders are based on finding of fact CWP No.7076 of 2009 [3] recorded after demarcation of land and after regular enquiry in which the petitioner was associated, the facts and circumstances do not call for judicial review of the orders. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point any defect in decision making. Findings of facts have been challenged, which however do not call for interference in extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) May 11, 2009 JUDGE avin