Disposed¶7

Issac Samuel v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Jul 2026CWP/16911/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the Electoral Roll of the Church and to hold the elections to the Pastorate Committee at the earliest; pending application(s), if any, also disposed of. ¶7

Issac Samuel Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner could be excluded from the Electoral Roll for the elections to the Pastorate Committee when no order deleting his name was ever passed and no opportunity of hearing was afforded to him. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

In the absence of any order deleting the petitioner's name from the Electoral Roll, the respondents cannot exclude him therefrom; such exclusion amounts to taking away his valuable right without affording any opportunity of hearing or passing any order, and is impermissible in law.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

The facts regarding the alleged misappropriation of Church funds by the petitioner were never established on the basis of any inquiry or proceedings conducted in accordance with the Principles of Natural Justice; therefore, there is no substance in the respondents' stand that the petitioner was not in good standing of the Church and could not be made its member.

¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CWP-16911-2016 (O&M), High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, decided July 02, 2026 (Tribhuvan Dahiya, J.) — Issac Samuel v. State of Punjab and others: The petitioner, earlier a member of the Committee whose name stood at serial no.141 of the voter list (Annexure P-7), found his name omitted from the fresh Electoral Roll dated 14.08.2016 (Annexure P-17) issued by respondent no.2/Pastorate Committee, St. Paul's Church, Amritsar, for elections scheduled on 21.08.2016, without any prior notice or order, which came to light when he went to file his nomination papers; this Court had stayed the elections vide order dated 19.08.2016. Respondents no.2 and 3 pleaded that, as elected Treasurer (April 1994–March 1996), the petitioner misappropriated Church funds and that under Part-II, Chapter-II Section IV Clause 5 of the Constitution of the Church of North India a person not in good standing cannot be a member; counsel conceded no deleting order was ever passed and no proceedings were initiated. Held (ratio): exclusion from the Electoral Roll absent any deleting order or opportunity of hearing takes away a valuable right and is impermissible in law; the misappropriation facts were never established through any inquiry conducted in accordance with the Principles of Natural Justice, so the 'not in good standing' plea has no substance. Petition disposed of with direction to include the petitioner's name in the Electoral Roll and hold the Pastorate Committee elections at the earliest; pending applications disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

210/1

¶3

CWP-16911-2016 (O&M) Date of decision: July 02, 2026

ISSAC SA M UEL

...Petitione r

Versus

STATE OF P UNJAB AND OTHERS

¶8

...Respondent s

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

¶10

Present: Mr. Kunal Vinayak, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Rishabh Singla, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.

¶12

Mr. Gurvinder Pal Singh, Advo c ate for Mr. P.S. Khurana, Advocate for respondents no.2 and 3.

¶13

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

The petition has been filed inte r alia seeking a writ of certiorar i quashing th e Electoral Roll issued by respo n dent no.2/Pastorate Committee , St. Paul’s C h urch, Amritsar, for conductin g elections, for members of th e Committee o n 21.08.2016, wherefrom the p etitioner’s name was arbitraril y excluded. F u rther, a writ of mandamus has b een sought directing the secon d respondent t o include the petitioner’s name in the Electoral Roll and accep t his nominati o n papers for the same. This Co u rt vide order dated 19.08.2016 , stayed the h o lding of elections till further or d ers. 2. Learned counsel contended tha t the petitioner was a member o f the Commit t ee earlier, and his name app e ared in the voter list at seria l no.141, Ann e xure P-7. However, for cond u cting elections to the Pastorat e Committee o n 21.08.2016, a new Electoral R oll dated 14.08.2016, Annexur e

¶15

JASPREET KAUR 2026.07.08 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶16

CWP-16911-2016 (O&M) -2-

¶17

P-17, was released, wherein the petitioner’s name was deleted without any prior notice to him or passing any order to that effect. The fact of exclusion came to his notice when he went to file the nomination papers for contesting elections as a member of the Pastorate Committee, leading to filing of the instant petition.

¶18

Respondents no.2 and 3 have filed a written statement taking the plea that petitioner was an elected Treasurer of the Committee and during his tenure from April, 1994 till March, 1996, he did not keep proper records and misappropriated the Church funds. According to Part-II, Chapter-II Section IV Clause 5 of the Constitution of the Church of North India, a person who is not in good standing of the Church cannot be a member also. Resultantly, his name was not included in Electoral Roll of the Church, nor could he be a member of the Pastorate Committee.

¶19

Learned counsel representing respondents no.2 and 3, however, is not in a position to dispute that no order deleting the petitioner’s name from the Electoral Roll was ever passed, nor were any proceedings initiated against him with regard to the alleged misappropriation of funds of the Church while he was a Treasurer.

¶20

Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been considered.

¶21

It remains undisputed that the petitioner’s name was on the Electoral Roll of the Church prior to the elections for the Pastorate Committee scheduled on 21.08.2016. The deletion of his name came as a bolt from the blue when he went to file the nomination papers for contesting

¶22

JASPREET KAUR 2026.07.08 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

¶23

CWP-16911-2016 (O&M) -3-

¶24

elections to be a member. It goes without saying that in the absence of there being any order deleting the petitioner’s name from the Electoral Roll, the respondents cannot exclude him therefrom, as it amounts to taking away his valuable right without affording any opportunity of hearing or passing any order to that effect. This is impermissible in law. Also, it has not been disputed that the facts regarding alleged misappropriation of Church funds by the petitioner were never established on the basis of any inquiry or proceedings conducted in accordance with the Principles of Natural Justice. Therefore, there is no substance in the stand taken by the respondents that the petitioner was not in good standing of the Church and could not be made its member.

¶25

In this view of the matter, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to include the petitioner’s name in the Electoral Roll of the Church and hold the elections to the Pastorate Committee at the earliest.

¶26

8. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.

¶27

July 02, 2026	(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)
Jaspreet Kaur Whether speaking/reasoned	JUDGE  : Yes/No
Whether reportable	: Yes/No

¶28

JASPREET KAUR 2026.07.08 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

Issac Samuel v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Issac Samuel v. State of Punjab and Ors.

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

Raghbir Singh Deceased through His Power of Attorney Holder and Legal Heir Shinder Pal Singh Aged Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, the Mall, Patiala through Its Chairman

Greater Mohali Area Development Authority Vs Permanent Lok Adalat Pus Sas Nagar Mohali and Another

Nirmal Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Sudhir Pahal Vs the Panipat Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd. and Another

Issac Samuel Vs State of Punjab and Others

Priyanka Bansal Vs State of Haryana and Others