Jora Singh vs State of Punjab and Others

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.

Civil Misc. No. 16813 of 2010

Civil Misc. Application is allowed.

Written statement, filed on behalf of Respondents No. 5, 6 and 8 to 11, is taken on record. Civil Writ Petition No. 17747 of 2010

Jora Singh, Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Ghanouri Kalan, Tehsil Dhuri, District Sangrur, has filed the present writ petition, assailing the resolution dated 17.9.2010 (Annexure P4), wherein it is depicted that "No Confidence Motion", moved against him, has been carried out.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has read the resolution (Annexure P4). The Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, who was present in the meeting, according to learned Counsel for the Petitioner, has not put the resolution to vote but asked each member of the Panchayat separately and recorded his satisfaction that 2/3rd majority of the members are against the Petitioner. The relevant portion of the resolution (Annexure P4) reads as under :

... Regarding resolution of No Confidence Motion, all the members were asked separately then Harbans Singh, Panch, Malkit Singh, Panch, Gurjant Singh, Panch, have supported Sarpanch Jora Singh while Gurmail Singh, Panch, Ajmer Singh, Panch, Sarabjit Singh, Panch, Smt. Gurmeet Kaur, Panch, Smt. Malan, Panch, Smt. Charanjit Kaur, Panch, Smt. Paramjit Kaur, have supported the resolution of No Confidence Motion....

One page of vernacular of resolution (Annexure P4), so attached with the present writ petition, is missing. Therefore, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has placed on the record a certified copy of the resolution, attested by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur and the same is taken on record.

A reading of the vernacular of resolution (Annexure P4) also reveals that the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, asked each and every member of the Panchayat separately and it is stated that 2/3rd members of the Panchayat are against the Sarpanch. The procedure, so adopted by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, cannot be appreciated. No voting has taken place. No record of the votes is available. The subjective satisfaction of the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur that 2/3rd members of the Panchayat are against the Sarpanch, cannot be taken into consideration. Either he should have put the resolution to vote or in presence of all, he ought to have taken the votes by raising of hands or distribution of slips.

Before this Court could pronounce the order on merits of the case, learned Counsel for Petitioner submits that in case the resolution is put again to vote, the same cannot be passed by 2/3rd majority of the members of the Panchayat.

Learned Counsel for Respondents No. 5, 6 and 8 to 11 submits that to set the controversy at rest, the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, shall again put the resolution to vote.

Learned Counsel for Respondents No. 1 to 4 also prays that the resolution be again put to vote.

This Court tends to grant the prayer jointly made by learned Counsel for the parties. Hence, Gurnet Singh, Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, who is present in the Court, is directed to issue a fresh notice to all the members of the Panchayat. The notice shall be of clear 7 days, excluding the date of notice and date of voting. Again the application submitted for "No Confidence Motion" shall be put to vote. Learned Counsel for Respondents No. 1 to 4 submits that the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, shall distribute the slips and each member of the Panchayat shall record his vote thereupon. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has referred to the endorsement made by Gobind Singh Kanjhla, Former Cabinet Minister, Punjab, on the application dated 5.8.2010 (Annexure P2) for "No Confidence Motion", submitted by the members of Panchayat and stated that he was the candidate of the ruling party, who has been defeated in the election to State Legislature and due to the political influence, the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, had not recorded the votes and recorded the resolution against the wishes of the members of the Panchayat. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that to allay the apprehension of the Petitioner that the resolution (Annexure P4) is not carried out due to political influence, he prays to this Court that somebody may be appointed as an independent Observer.

Learned Counsel for the parties have suggested the name of Mr. Vikram Singh Dhakla, Advocate, who is present in the Court, to act as an Observer. Leaned counsel for the Petitioner submits that `11,000 shall be paid to Mr. Dhakla as his remuneration, by the Petitioner, for acting as an independent Observer. Gurnet Singh, Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur, who is present in the Court, submits that he will issue notices to all the members of Panchayat on 1.12.2010 for holding the meeting on 10.12.2010. Learned Counsel for the parties also undertake to inform their respective parties regarding holding of the meeting on 10.12.2010 at 10.00 A.M. in the office of the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Sherpur.

In view of the joint prayer made by learned Counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is accepted and the impugned resolution (Annexure P4) is set aside and the application pertaining to "No Confidence Motion" be again put to vote, as per arrangement noticed above on the joint suggestion of learned Counsel for the parties.