Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2026) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 21085 = 2026:PHHC:080072
Decided on: 20.05.2026
Present:
Mr. Khalid Tauru, Advocate, for the petitioner.
***
Sarpanch/ Panch/ Panchayat Secretary -- Enquiry -- Alleged misuse of Panchayat funds on private land -- Absence of prima facie material -- Prayer for roving enquiry not maintainable -- Writ petition dismissed.
***
Constitution of India, Articles 226 and 227 -- Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, Sections 51(3) and 53 -- Sarpanch/ Panch/ Panchayat Secretary -- Enquiry -- Allegation of misuse and misappropriation of Panchayat funds for construction of passage on private land -- Petitioner sought enquiry against Sarpanch, Panches and Panchayat Secretary along with recovery of allegedly misappropriated amount -- Except representations submitted by petitioner, no substantive material placed on record to prima facie support allegations -- Petitioner held to be seeking a roving enquiry on speculative foundations -- Writ petition dismissed.
(Paras 3 to 5)
Cases referred:
1. Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of W.B. 2004 (3) SCC 349.
***
HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL) –
Petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing respondents No.2 to 5 to forthwith initiate a detailed departmental inquiry under Section 51(3) read with Section 53 of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (in short ‘1994 Act’) against respondent No.7 (Sarpanch) alongwith respondents No.8 to 11 (Panches) and also the then Panchayat Secretary for the alleged misconduct involving misuse of public funds on private land.
1.1 A further prayer has also been made for directing respondents No.2 to 5 to recover the allegedly misappropriated amount of Rs.3,76,783/- alongwith 18% interest per annum.
2. The petitioner is stated to be resident of village Khori Khurd. In pursuance to resolution dated 06.04.2023, an amount of Rs.3,76,783/- was withdrawn from the Gram Panchayat fund for the construction of passage. It is alleged that the passage, which has been constructed at the site, is not on a Panchayat or public land, but falls within the private land belonging to certain individuals. Evidently, the names of individuals are missing in the pleadings of the petitioner.
2.1 The petitioner alleges that respondents No.7 to 11 alongwith the Panchayat Secretary and other concerned officials have misused their official position and abused the Panchayat funds, so as to extend undue benefit to the private persons. The petitioner is stated to have submitted representations dated 19.11.2025 (Annexure P-2 to P-5). However, it is stated that no action has been taken thereon. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper-book with his able assistance.
3. From a bare perusal of the paper-book, it is evident that apart from the representations submitted by the petitioner, there is no material placed on record, which may prima facie substantiate the allegations being levelled by the petitioner in the present writ petition. Evidently, the petitioner is wanting a roving enquiry against respondents No.7 to 11 and other officials of the Panchayat department without placing on record any substantial material against them.
4. In “Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of W.B.” 2004 (3) SCC 349, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that petition seeking to make a roving enquiry on speculative foundations and premises, cannot be entertained. It appears that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition with some oblique motive.
5. In view of the above, I see no compelling reason which may warrant interference by this Court. Resultantly, the present writ petition fails and the same is accordingly, dismissed.
6. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.
Petition dismissed.
********