The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a stay on the transfer of Sukhdev Singh, the Executive Officer (EO) of the Kharar Municipal Council, and has issued a notice of motion to the Punjab government. The transfer order will remain stayed until the next hearing scheduled for February 25, 2027.
Petition and Allegations
Singh had approached the High Court through a civil writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, seeking the quashing of his transfer from Kharar to the Nagar Panchayat in Mallanwala, Ferozepur, and a stay on its implementation. In his plea, Singh claimed that he was made a scapegoat after he objected to building plans submitted by a prominent local builder, alleging violations of prescribed norms. He submitted that he had refused to clear certain site plans due to irregularities, and his transfer was ordered on the same day he raised objections.
Court Proceedings
After hearing the matter, the court issued a notice of motion. Additional Advocate General Ishan Kaushal appeared for the state and accepted the notice, while counsel for the respondents sought time to seek instructions. The court adjourned the matter to February 2027 while granting interim relief.
Background of Disciplinary Proceedings
The controversy over the transfer comes amid disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Punjab government in connection with alleged irregularities in a road recarpeting project in Kharar. The government had earlier ordered the chargesheeting of Singh and Assistant Municipal Engineer Suresh Kumar over alleged supervisory lapses, misuse of municipal funds, and financial loss to the exchequer after a newly recarpeted road developed defects within days.
Complaint and Inquiry
The action followed a complaint lodged on the Chief Minister's Public Grievance Redressal System (PGRS) regarding poor quality work on a road leading to Gurdwara Sahib Akali Office and a proposed sports complex. Mohali Deputy Commissioner Komal Mittal, who conducted the inquiry, flagged gross negligence and major supervisory lapses. The report noted that the road deteriorated within days, pointing to deviation from engineering norms and poor execution.
Inspection Findings
The inspection also found that seal coat work was carried out immediately after laying bituminous layers without adequate curing time, along with issues such as obstructions and poor site planning. Responsibility was fixed on the EO and AME for failing to ensure compliance and effective supervision.
