- (1.) CM-15254-CWP-2014 The present application is for impleading the legal representatives of deceased-Sher Singh (respondent No. 5), who is stated to have expired. The legal representatives of deceased-Sher Singh are mentioned in para 2 of the application. It is stated that there is no other legal heir of deceased-Sher Singh except the persons mentioned in the application. Heard. Application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The persons mentioned in the application are ordered to be impleaded as legal heirs of deceased for the limited purpose of pursuing this writ petition. Registry is directed to make necessary correction in the memo of parties. CWP No. 3286-1993
(2.) Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the orders/letters dated 30.09.1987 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No. 3-District Development and Panchayat Officer, Jullundur and 22.04.1991 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No. 2-Director, Panchayats, Punjab.
(3.) Brief facts of the case are to the effect that election to the Gram Panchayat was held in the month of September, 1983. In the said election, fresh Gram Panchayat was constituted and Tarsem Singh was elected as a Sarpanch. Earlier to the said election, respondent No. 5-Sher Singh was the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat and ceased to be so in September, 1983. There is averment in the writ petition that the Gram Panchayat owns 135 kanals and 13 marlas of land in village Garhi Ajit Singh. The said land remained vacant and was not given on lease for cultivation which resulted into loss to the Gram Panchayat. It is further averred that there was omission on the part of Ex. Sarpanch, respondent No. 5. Thereafter, complaint dated 10.09.1985 was filed against respondent No. 5 and matter was inquired into. Notice dated 01.07.1987 was issued for explaining the irregularities and wrongful expenditure made by him during his tenure and reference to audit note w.e.f. 1/79 to 1/84 has also been made. Respondent No. 4-Block Development and Panchayat Officer passed assessment order dated 31.07.1987 whereby an amount of Rs. 85,963.35 was assessed as loss to the Gram Panchayat and respondent No. 5 was held liable to pay the same. However, vide impugned letter/order dated 30.09.1987 (Annexure P-6), respondent No. 3 held that respondent No. 5 is not liable for the aforesaid loss, rather block officers are responsible for the same. Thereafter, vide impugned letter dated 22.04.1991 (Annexure P-7), respondent No. 2 ordered consignment of the complaint filed against respondent No. 5 on the ground that charges were not proved.;