SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 86335

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SATPAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS – Respondent
CWP_14468_2026



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 08.05.2026 Satpal ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present: Mr. Onkar Rai, Advocate, for the petitioner.

*****

HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL)

Prayer in the present civil writ petition, filed under Articles

226/227 of Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for setting aside the order dated 10.10.2025 (Annexure P-10) passed by respondent No.3-learned Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad, District Faridabad, whereby the petitioner has been removed from the post of Panch of village Deeg, District Faridabad.

1.1 A further prayer has been made for setting aside the order dated 04.05.2026 (Annexure P-17) passed by respondent No.2-learned Divisional Commissioner, Faridabad, District Faridabad, vide which an appeal filed by the petitioner against his removal order, has been dismissed.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the paper-book with his able assistance.

3. The order dated 10.10.2025 (Annexure P-10), reads as under: -

“On the basis of the Demarcation Report dated 06.06.2023 and the Eviction Order dated 04.07.2025 passed by the Court of the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (C), Ballabgarh, against Shri Satpal, confirming his illegal occupation of Panchayat land in Eviction Case No.83/Collector, Ballabgarh dated 07.01.2025, it stands clearly established that Shri Satpal, Panch, Ward No.1, Gram Panchayat Deeg, Block Ballabgarh, is in unauthorized possession of Panchayat land measuring 102 square yards, situated at Firni No.90.

Shri Satpal, Panch, Ward No.1, Gram Panchayat Deeg, was granted an opportunity of personal hearing on 08.07.2025, during which he submitted his written reply. However, he failed to produce any substantive evidence to refute or disprove the finding of encroachment upon the said parcel of Panchayat land.

As per Section 175(n) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994; “No person shall be a Sarpanch or a Panch of a Gram Panchayat if he has been in unauthorized possession of land or other immovable property belonging to the Gram Panchayat at any time during the period of one year immediately preceding the date of election.”

In view of the above and on account of his continued illegal encroachment on Panchayat land, Shri Satpal, Panch, stands disqualified from holding the post of Panch of Gram Panchayat Deeg under the provisions of Section 175(n) of the said Act. Accordingly, I, Vikram, I.A.S., Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad, in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 51(1) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, hereby order that Shri Satpal, Panch, Ward No.1, Gram Panchyat Deeg, is removed from the office of Panch with immediate effect, being disqualified under Section 175(n) of the said Act.”

3.1. The aforesaid removal order has been further affirmed by the learned Commissioner, Faridabad Division, Faridabad, vide order dated

04.05.2026 (Annexure P-17), the relevant extract thereof reads as under: -

“After hearing the arguments of both the parties and after perusing the record of the lower officer, it was found that demarcation of the disputed land was got conducted, in which his illegal possession was found, on the basis of which the Gram Panchayat filed an eviction petition against the Appellant. Vide order dated 04.11.2025, the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Ballabgarh, after providing opportunities of hearing to the Appellant, evicted him on the basis of demarcation dated 06.06.2029 (correct date is 06.06.2023). At the time of hearing of the present appeal, this fact was also stated by the appellant himself that one demarcation of the disputed area had been conducted on 12.06.2016, in which the name of the grandfather of the Appellant had been shown as an illegal occupant. Upon this, the Presiding Officer told the counsel for the Appellant to vacate the illegal possession. The the counsel/Appell

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top