MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J. - (1.) SUCCINCTLY , the relevant facts, which require to be noticed for deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant writ petition and emanating from the record, are that in the wake of general Gram Panchayat election, the petitioner was elected as a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat of village Amir Shahwala, Block Makhu, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur, on 19.07.2008, in view of the provisions of The Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994(hereinafter to be referred as "the Act ").
(2.) THE petitioner claimed that the rival group of Panches started making efforts, to get him illegally removed from the post of Sarpanch due to political vendetta and get elected their own Sarpanch. In order to fulfill their evil design, respondent Nos.5 to 7 approached The Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Makhu(respondent No.4)(for short "the BDPO ") and filed an affidavit to initiate 'No Confidence Motion' proceedings against him(petitioner) on the ground that he did not enjoy confidence of majority of the Panches. The case set-up by the petitioner, in brief, insofar as relevant, was that the BDPO vide notice dated 20.10.2010(Annexure P-1) called a meeting of Sarpanch and all Panches, scheduled to be held on 29.10.2010 at 11.00 AM in his office, for the discussion of 'No Confidence Motion' proceedings. When notice (Anneuxre P-1) was served, then the petitioner made an endorsement on it that as he had to go out of station due to urgent household work from 28.10.2010 to 31.10.2010, therefore, he would not be in a position to attend the meeting on 29.10.2010. It was claimed that the meeting scheduled to be held on 29.10.2010 was postponed. It was further alleged by the petitioner that on 01.11.2010, he along with respondent No.8 went to the office of the BDPO, remained there and enquired about the proceedings and the BDPO told him that he had called a meeting for discussion on 'No Confidence Motion' on 29.10.2010. But since, he (petitioner) had expressed his inability to attend the meeting, so it was not held on that day. The BDPO assured that he will hold a fresh meeting, after intimating him (petitioner) and all other Panches, by sending the fresh notice in this behalf.
(3.) THE case of the petitioner further proceeds that the BDPO with a mala fide intention, in connivance with respondent Nos.5 to 7 and under political pressure, allegedly held a secret meeting on 01.11.2010 and stated to have passed the impugned Resolution(Annexure P-2) of 'No Confidence Motion' against the petitioner and elected respondent No.5 as an authorised Panch to exercise the powers of Sarpanch.;