The High Court allowed a writ petition contending that the petitioner, a Sarpanch, was illegally suspended without reasons or a hearing. The court set aside the suspension order and directed reinstatement.
Impugned order of suspension set aside; petitioner to be reinstated; respondent directed to pass fresh order after hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP. No. 12005 of 2009 Date of Decision: 11.8.2009.
Sukhdev Singh
--Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab etc.
--Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:Mr. C.L. Premy, Advocate for the petitioner.
PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL)
Notice of motion.
Mr. P.C. Goyal, Addl. A.G., Punjab has been asked to accept notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
The petitioner has challenged the order dated 8.6.2009 (Annexure P-1), whereby the petitioner, Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Melak Kangan, Block Dharamkot at Ishekhan, Distt. Moga has been ordered to be suspended under Section 20(1) of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Financial Commissioner also stands rejected vide order dated 6.7.2009. The Appellate Authority has remanded the case to respondent no.2 without disturbing the suspension.
From the perusal of impugned order (Annexure P-1), it appears that petitioner has been suspended without recording any reasons and grounds, whatsoever. The Appellate Authority accepting the contention of the petitioner that his suspension is in violation of principles of natural justice, has simply remanded the case without disturbing the suspension. Since the order suffers from total non-application of mind and without any
CWP. No. 12005 of 2009
-2-
reason much less a legal and valid reason, the order of suspension is not sustainable in law.
In view of the above, this petition is allowed. The impugned order of suspension is hereby set aside. Petitioner is ordered to be reinstated and respondent no.2 is directed to pass a fresh order in view of the remand order of the Appellate Authority after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law.
(PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE
11.8.2009 lucky
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an order of suspension passed without recording any reasons and without an opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice.
Sukhdev Singh
State of Punjab
Permod Kohli
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
