Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Removal of Nagar Council President, Samana; Terms Government Order Cryptic and Non-Speaking

Case Name: Ashwani Gupta v. State of Punjab & Others
Date of Judgment: November 4, 2025
Citation: CWP-32647-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi & Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikas Suri

Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed the order dated October 17/21, 2025, passed by the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Local Government, Punjab, removing Ashwani Gupta from the post of President, Nagar Council, Samana, under Section 22 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. The Bench observed that the order was “cryptic and non-speaking,” as it failed to address the petitioner’s specific objection regarding the validity of the no-confidence meeting held on February 15, 2025. The Court held that before upholding a resolution of no confidence, the State must determine whether the meeting was convened in accordance with Sections 25 and 26 of the Act, which prescribe the procedure for requisition and notice.

Summary: The petitioner challenged his removal as President, Nagar Council, Samana, contending that the meeting in which the no-confidence motion was passed was illegally convened. He argued that as per Section 25 of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, only after expiry of 14 days from receipt of requisition and upon failure of the President to convene such meeting could councilors themselves call a meeting. In this case, the councilors convened the meeting prematurely, rendering the resolution invalid. The petitioner’s counsel contended that the State authority failed to consider this objection and passed a mechanical order. The State, while defending the decision, submitted that the President’s reply to the show cause notice had been examined before his removal, and no further procedural infirmity existed. After hearing both sides, the Bench found that the impugned order lacked reasoning and did not reflect any consideration of the petitioner’s procedural objection regarding validity of the meeting.

Decision: The Court set aside the impugned order removing the petitioner and remanded the matter to the State Government to pass a fresh, reasoned order. The Bench directed that the competent authority must specifically determine whether the no-confidence meeting dated February 15, 2025, was validly convened under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, before deciding on the petitioner’s removal. Pending applications were also disposed of accordingly.