P&H High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Disqualification Of Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann, Ministers

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a PIL seeking disqualification of the Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and other ministers, holding that a writ of quo warranto is maintainable only when there is a clear lack of eligibility to hold public office.

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry said,

"We have gone through the entire petition but apart from alleging corrupt deeds and misdemeanours against respondents No.3 to 18, we have not been apprised of any deficiencies in the essential requisite eligibility to hold the office as held by respondents No.3 (CM Bhagwant Mann to 18 (other Ministers)...We have already held in one of our earlier decisions where a similar writ of quo warranto was sought qua the office of Advocate General of the State of Haryana as well as Punjab. In the said case CWP-PIL-141- 2025 titled 'Pradeep Sigh Advocate vs. State of Haryana & others', we have held that a writ of quo warranto cannot be sought by alleging inefficiency, corrupt deeds or misdemeanour against persons holding public office, unless it is established that the eligibility prerequisites for holding such a public office are wanting".

The petitioner, appearing in person, had sought a writ of quo warranto on the ground that the respondents were functioning against the “spirit and soul of the Constitution.” He also sought directions to the Speaker of the Punjab Legislative Assembly to initiate disqualification proceedings, restrain disbursal of financial benefits to the respondents, and order recovery of certain expenditures after an inquiry.

At the outset, the Court outlined the limited scope of a writ of quo warranto, observing that such a writ can be issued only when a person holding a public office is found ineligible under constitutional or statutory provisions or lacks the essential qualifications required for the post.

AG Punjab Maninderjit Singh Bedi had argued that the plea is not maintainable in the form of Public Interest Litigation and it is  beyond the scope of quo warranto proceedings.

Upon examining the petition, the Bench noted that the petitioner had primarily levelled allegations of corruption, misconduct and misdemeanour against the respondents, but had failed to point out any deficiency in their eligibility or qualifications to hold the offices in question.

The Court relied on its earlier judgment in Pradeep Singh Advocate v. State of Haryana & others (CWP-PIL-141-2025), wherein it had held that allegations of impropriety or misconduct are beyond the scope of quo warranto proceedings, which are strictly confined to examining eligibility criteria.

Reiterating the above position, the Bench held that claims of corrupt practices or inefficiency cannot be adjudicated in a quo warranto petition unless they directly relate to statutory or constitutional disqualification.

Finding no merit in the plea, the Court held that no case was made out for interference and dismissed the petition.

Petitioner in person.

AG Punjab Maninderjit Singh Bedi with Mr. Salil Sabhlok, Sr. Deputy Advocate General Punjab for the respondent/State.

Title: Jagmohan Singh Bhatti Advocate

Click here to read order