Dismissed¶¶27

Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jul 2025CWP/17066/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CWP dismissed; writ of mandamus refused; vague and bald allegations unsupported by material; writ jurisdiction cannot substitute evidentiary proof; Nagar Panchayat President; impersonation and tampering with government documents; intimidation of employees; Village Kotha Guru, Bathinda; No Confidence Motion concealed; photographs Annexure P-1; representation Annexure P-2; Articles 226/227 Constitution of India; Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh; Justice Harsh Bunger; liberty to avail other remedies.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petitioner left free to avail other remedies as may be available, in accordance with law. ¶¶27

Avtar Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petitioner left free to avail other remedies as may be available, in accordance with law.

¶¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing respondents No.2 and 3 to take action against respondents No.4 and 5 for allegedly misleading and defrauding the public, claiming to be President of Nagar Panchayat, tampering with government documents and intimidating government workers. +1 more

¶¶11

Court's answer

The petitioner has made vague and bald accusations against the private respondents, placing reliance solely upon photographs (Annexure P-1) in which a few persons are seen.

¶¶26

Ratio / Principle

There is no material in support of the accusations made by the petitioner in the writ petition.

¶¶26

Key takeaways

Even if the accusations were accepted for the sake of argument, establishing them would require leading of evidence, which is not permissible in writ proceedings.ratio¶¶26
The petitioner's counsel did not dispute that a 'No Confidence Motion' had already been moved against the petitioner.obiter¶¶21
Finding no merit in the writ petition, the Court dismissed it while leaving the petitioner open to avail such other remedies as may be available in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Harsh Bunger, J.), CWP-17066-2025 (O&M), decided 01.07.2025 — Writ petition (Arts. 226/227) by the elected President of Nagar Panchayat, Village Kotha Guru (Distt. Bathinda), seeking mandamus directing respondents No.2–3 to act against private respondents No.4 (Jaswant Singh) and No.5 (Buta Singh) for alleged impersonation of the President, tampering with government documents and intimidation of employees. DISMISSED: accusations held vague and bald, resting solely on photographs (Annexure P-1) showing a few persons, with no supporting material; even if accepted, they would require leading of evidence, impermissible in writ proceedings. Non-disclosure of the 'No Confidence Motion' moved against the petitioner noted. Liberty reserved to pursue other lawful remedies.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP-17066-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.07.2025

¶3

AVTAR S INGH

¶4

…Petitioner Versu s

¶5

STATE O F PUNJAB AND OTHERS

¶6

…Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER

¶8

Present : Mr. P.K.S. Phoolka, Advoca t e for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Nirmaljit Singh Diwana , Sr. D.A.G., Punjab.

¶10

HARSH BUNGER, J. (ORAL)

¶11

Prayer in the present writ p e tition, filed under Articles 226/ 2 27 of the C o nstitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandam u s , for directing respondents N o.2 and 3 to take action aga i nst responde n ts No.4 and 5, for misleadi n g and defrauding the public a nd residents of Village Kotha Guru, Distric t Bathinda by claiming themse l ves to be th e President of Nagar Panchay a t and further tampering with the governm e nt documents and intimidating t he government workers etc. 2. Briefly, the petitioner is sta t ed to be the duly elected Presi d ent of Nagar Panchayat, Village Kotha Guru, wherein, about 34-35 govern m ent employe e s are stated to have been emplo y ed for various works. It is clai m ed by the pe t itioner that there is an office o f the President of Nagar Pancha y at, wherein, t here is also a chair in his offic e for the President, apart from o t her equipme n t lying in the office.

¶12

GURPREET KAUR 2025.07.15 19:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

2.1 It is alleged that the private respondent No.4-Jaswant Singh often comes to the petitioner’s office with his friends and goons and abuses government employees. It is further alleged that said respondent No.4Jaswant Singh enters the petitioner’s office in his absence and tampers with government papers and files and forcibly sits on the chair of the President.

¶15

2.2 Petitioner alleges that on 15.05.2025, he had to visit Bathinda city for some personal work and at about 12’O clock noon, he received a call from the employees stating that respondent No.4 had forcibly opened the petitioner’s office and was sitting on his chair along with respondent No.5Buta Singh and other un-known persons.

¶16

2.3 It is stated that respondent No.5 along with his wife has kept their votes in different wards and has wrongly been elected as a Municipal Councillor, therefore, his membership should be cancelled.

¶17

2.4 It is further submitted that the petitioner apprehends danger to his life and property at the hands of private respondents, for which, a representation dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure P-2) has also been moved, however, no action has been taken thereupon so far.

¶18

2.5 In the afore-mentioned circumstances, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

¶19

At this stage, learned State counsel has informed the Court that in fact, the petitioner is agitated against private respondents on account of the fact that `No Confidence Motion’ has been moved against the petitioner.

¶20

Heard.

¶21

During the course of the hearing of this petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed the fact that `No Confidence Motion’ has already been moved against the petitioner.

¶22

GURPREET KAUR 2025.07.15 19:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

5.1 Apparently, the petitioner has not mentioned the afore-said fact regarding `No Confidence Motion’ moved against him in the present writ petition.

¶25

Be that as it may, in my considered opinion, the petitioner has made vague and bald accusations against the private respondents by simply placing reliance upon photographs (Annexure P-1) wherein, few persons are seen. There is no material in support of the accusations made by the petitioner in the instant writ petition. Even if the afore-said accusations are accepted for the sake of arguments, even then, in my considered view, it would require leading of some evidence, which is not permissible in the present proceedings.

¶26

In view of what has been discussed above, I find no merit in the present writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed, however, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail his other remedy/ies, as may be available to him, in accordance with law.

¶27

All pending application/s, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶28

July 01, 2025 (HARSH BUNGER) gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶29

GURPREET KAUR 2025.07.15 19:00 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Iswar Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Rajender Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Rajender Singh Vs State of Haryana Thru Its Principal Secretary

Paramjit Kaur Vs State of Haryana and Others

Kamaljit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Raj Kumar Bali Vs State of Punjab and Ors.