Dismissed¶22

Jaswinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Apr 2026CWP/6718/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gram Panchayat fund account; writ of mandamus; Sarpanch suspended; no authorised Panch elected or appointed; recognition of signatures with bank; advance copy served; State counsel appeared; Dera Baba Nanak; District Gurdaspur; State of Punjab; writ petition dismissed; liberty to approach competent authority for appointment of authorised Panch; pending applications closed.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was dismissed, with liberty left open to the petitioners to approach the competent authority for appointment of an authorised Panch in accordance with law, and pending applications, if any, ordered closed. ¶22

Jaswinder Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ in the nature of mandamus should issue directing the respondent authorities to facilitate the legal operation of the Gram Panchayat fund account of the petitioners' Gram Panchayat (Block Dera Baba Nanak, District Gurdaspur) by recognising the signatures of the Sarpanch/authorised Panch with the bank.

¶15

Court's answer

Since the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat already stands suspended and in his place no authorised Panch has been elected/appointed, and none has been appointed till date, no relief can be granted in the present proceedings.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The instant civil writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

¶22

Key takeaways

It is left open to the petitioners to approach the competent authority for appointment of an authorised Panch in accordance with law.ratio¶22
Pending applications, if any, shall also stand closed.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Civil writ petition by Ashwinder Singh and others against the State of Punjab and others, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to facilitate the legal operation of the Gram Panchayat fund account of their Gram Panchayat (Block Dera Baba Nanak, District Gurdaspur) by recognising the signatures of the Sarpanch/authorised Panch with the bank. Upon service of advance copy, learned State counsel appeared and submitted that the Sarpanch already stood suspended and in his place no authorised Panch had been elected/appointed. Holding that, with the Sarpanch suspended and no authorised Panch appointed till date, no relief could be granted in the present proceedings, the court dismissed the petition, left it open to the petitioners to approach the competent authority for appointment of an authorised Panch in accordance with law, and directed that pending applications, if any, stand closed.

��

��

�� !��"�� !��

�� !#$%�&'�(%)+&,��-��-��

¶5

�#+.,(%/�0,12�#,(�&$2%/+

¶6

------��%$$&,%/+

¶7

3%/+4+

¶8

0$#$%�&'��4,5#6�#,(�&$2%/+

¶9

��------��%+7&,(%,$+

¶10

��8 9��-��0��0��

¶11

�/%+%,$�� /-��+2��4,%%$�0*,12:��(;&)#$% '&/�$2%�7%$$&,%/+-�

¶12

�/-��+2##,�<#4+2#=:��4,5#6-��

¶13

�-� �-�

¶14

� ��0�� : � -��9��

¶15

�- �/#>%/�,�$2+�);=�./$�7%$$&,�'=%(�4,(%/��/$)=%+�� &'��&,+$$4$&,�&'��,(#:�,$%/�#=#:�+�'&/�++4#,)%�&'�#�./$�,�$2%�,#$4/% &'�?#,(#?4+�'&/�(/%)$,1�/%+7&,(%,$�#4$2&/$%+�$&�'#)=$#$%�$2%�=#.'4= &7%/#$&, �&' �$2% �1/#? �7#,)2#>#$ �'4,( �#))&4,$ �&' ��/#? ��#,)2#>#$ �#/(&/.#= �<#=#,: � =&)@ �!%/# � #6# ��#,#@: �!*+$/*)$ ��4/(#+74/ �6> /%)&1,A,1�$2%�+1,#$4/%+�&'�0#/7#,)2��4$2&/A%(��#,)2�.$2�$2%�6#,@��&(#>:�=%#/,%(�0$#$%�)&4,+%=�2#+�#77%#/%(�,�74/+4#,)%�$& #(;#,)%�)&7>�&'�./$�7%$$&,�2#;,1�6%%,�+%/;%(�47&,�/%+7&,(%,$�0$#$%9%#/,%(�0$#$%�)&4,+%=�+46?$+�$2#$�7%$$&,%/��&-��0#/7#,)2�&'��/#? �#,)2#>#$��#/(&/.#=�<#=#,��#=/%#(>�+$#,(+�+4+7%,(%(�#,(�,�2+�7=#)%: ,&�#4$2&/A%(�7#,)2�2#+�6%%,�%=%)$%(�#77&,$%(-�

¶16

�- <%%7*,1�,�;%.�$2%�#'&/%+#(�'#)$�$2#$�7%$$*&,%/��&-��

¶17

��#+.,(%/�0,12�:�0#/7#,)2:��/#?��#,)2#>#$��#/(&/.#=�<#=#,:� =&)@

¶18

SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2026.04.08 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

��

¶20

��

¶21

!%/#� #6#��#,#@:�!+$/)$��4/(#+74/�#=/%#(>�+$#,(+�+4+7%,(%(�#,(�,& #4$2&/A%(�7#,)2�2#+�6%%,�#77&,$%(�$==�(#$%:�$2%/%'&/%:�,&�/%=%'�)#,�6% 1/#,$%(�,�$2%�7/%+%,$�7/&)%%(,1+-�

¶22

�- �,�;%.�&'�#6&;%:�$2%�,+$#,$�);=�./$�7%$$&,�'#=+�#,(�+#?% +�#))&/(,1=>:�(+?++%(B�2&.%;%/:�=%#;,1�$�&7%,�$&�7%$$&,%/+��&-��$& 7%$$&,%/ ��&- ��$& �#77/&#)2 �)&,)%/,%(�)&?7%$%,$ �#4$2&/$> �'&/ #77&,$?%,$�&'�#,�#4$2&/A%(�7#,)2�,�#))&/(#,)%�.*$2�=#.-��

¶23

�- �%,(,1�#77=)#$&,��+�:�'�#,>:�+2#==�#=+&�+$#,(�)=&+%(-

¶24

��0�� !��

¶25

��-��-�� +5@+

¶26

�2%$2%/�+7%#@*,1�/%#+&,%(� � "%+��& �2%$2%/�/%7&/$#6=% � "%+��&

¶27

SANJIV KUMAR SHARMA 2026.04.08 10:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Jaswinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaswinder Singh and Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kewal Singh Brar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Radha Kumari Vs Union of India through Joint Secretary Psp

Sahil Ali Vs Union of India and Another

Shrawan Kumar Vs the Commissioner Rewari

Narinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Others

Andeep Vs State of Haryana and Others