BUTTA SINGH vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. — LPA/1376/2026

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 14-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010811552026

Filing Number

LPA/29436/2026

Filing Date

11-May-2026

Registration No

LPA/1376/2026

Registration Date

12-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi , Mr. Justice Deepak Manchanda

Coram

Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi , Mr. Justice Deepak Manchanda

Category

1.14 - LPA MUNICIPAL / PANCHAYAT ( 338 )

Judicial Branch

LPA SECTION

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BUTTA SINGH

    Adv. N.P.S. MANN

  2. 2.State of Punjab

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

  2. 2.State of Punjab

  3. 3.Director

  4. 4.District Development and Panchayat Officer

  5. 5.Block Development and Panchayat Officer

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi,mr. Justice Deepak ManchandaView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Butta Singh's appeal challenging his suspension as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Laleana pending an enquiry into alleged government land encroachment. The court upheld the suspension as a lawful temporary measure, not punishment, reasoning that suspension prevents misuse of official position during disciplinary proceedings and that the enquiry must conclude by 31.05.2026. The court rejected arguments that suspension constitutes unlawful stigma or that absence of complaints from landowners precludes enquiry, holding that government land encroachment allegations warrant investigation regardless. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. LPA/1376/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed Butta Singh's appeal challenging his suspension as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Laleana pending an enquiry into alleged government land encroachment. The court upheld the suspension as a lawful temporary measure, not punishment, reasoning that suspension prevents misuse of official position during disciplinary proceedings and that the enquiry must conclude by 31.05.2026. The court rejected arguments that suspension constitutes unlawful stigma or that absence of complaints from landowners precludes enquiry, holding that government land encroachment allegations warrant investigation regardless. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case