IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 215 LPA-957-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11.09.2025 NATHU RAM ...Appellant Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present:- Mr. Ashok Kumar Khunger, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Rahul Rampal, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Peeush Gagneja, Advocate, for respondent No.7. ***** HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL) 1. In the present appeal, the challenge is to the order dated 10.09.2021 (Annexure A-1) passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP- 2476-2021, wherein the prayer of the appellant that there are allegations of misappropriation of Government grant against respondent No.7 and the same should be looked into, was disposed of by relegating to take alternative remedy. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the works, which were done by respondent No.7 during his tenure as Sarpanch from the year 2008 to 2013, were of sub-standard hence, the same should be looked into and appropriate action may be ordered to be taken against respondent No.7. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone HARISH KUMAR 2025.09.12 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment LPA-957-2021 (O&M) (2) through the case file with their able assistance. 4. It may be noticed that as per Section 216 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, no action can be taken against the Sarpanch after expiry of 04 years from the occurrence of the loss, waste or misapplication or after the expiry of two years from his ceasing to be a member, whichever is later, with regard to his previous work and in the present case, tenure of respondent No.7 is from the year 2008 to 2013, whereas the writ petition was filed in the year 2021, i.e. after a period of eight years. Further, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the matter by relegating the appellant to avail alternative remedy. 6. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances and in the absence of any perversity being pointed out in the impugned order dated 10.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge on the basis of the facts on record, no ground is made out for any interference by this Court. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. ( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI ) JUDGE ( VIKAS SURI ) September 11, 2025 JUDGE harish Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No HARISH KUMAR 2025.09.12 16:04 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment