Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

GRAM PANCHAYAT JASDEV SINGH NAGAR versus SHRI PRIYANK BHARTI & ANR.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Gram Panchayat Jasdev Singh Nagar v. Shri Priyank Bharti & Anr. - COCP-1182-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 8941 (19 October 2006)

COCP No.1182 of 2006 -: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.1182 of 2006

Date of decision: October 30, 2006.

Gram Panchayat Jasdev Singh Nagar

...Petitioner(s)

v.

Shri Priyank Bharti & Anr.

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri Jasdeep Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri G.S. Cheema, Sr. Dy. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

In deference to the order dated October 23, 2006, Mr. H.S.

Sodhi, BDPO, Ludhiana-I is present in court. He has filed his affidavit, which is taken on record.

Though, it is pretended that there were some complaints against the petitioner due to which its Sarpanch was restrained from executing the works in the village, however, it is not disputed by Learned Counsel for the petitioner that the said order has since been withdrawn by the BDPO and the petitioner has been permitted to carry on with the development works and has also been permitted to operate the bank accounts.

In this view of the matter and having regard to the fact that the directions issued by this court have since been complied with, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the BDPO, Ludhiana-I not to cause any COCP No.1182 of 2006 -: 2 :-

kind of hindrance in the statutory performance of the duties by the Sarpanch and other Panches of the Gram Panchayat. However, if any complaint is received with regard to misappropriation, embezzlement, financial irregularity and/or poor quality of work, such a complaint shall be objectively inquired into and those found responsible for the same shall be proceeded against in accordance with law. With these directions and observations, this petition is disposed of.

Rule discharged.

October 30, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.