JUDGMENT Mr. Ranjit Singh, J.: - Being aggrieved against the order passed by the Director cancelling the resolution passed by the Panchayat in exercise of his powers under Section 199 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short “the Act”), the petitioner-Panchayat has filed this writ petition. 2. In village Kot Grewal, there are three ponds in which the dirty water of the houses used to accommodate. There is one pond near the SC Mohalla where most of the dirty water used to gather. It is alleged that due to this, the water used to over flow with the result the dirty water used to enter the houses of Scheduled Caste Mohalla. The area of this pond is about 10 kanals 13 marlas, whereas there is another pond in the village, which is statedly having an area of 3 acres and is getting waste water from a few houses. Gram Panchayat accordingly passed a resolution on 7.3.2011 for putting the water of the pond of SC Mohalla to another pond by connecting it through underground pipes. The resolution was passed by General Body meeting on 17.2.2012. Thereafter, the action was taken to connect these two ponds. It is alleged that the grant was also sanctioned. Even some directions were issued by a writ court when the petitioner had approached this court through Public Interest Litigation, the work had also commenced. Subsequently, however, this resolution has been cancelled, which is now put to challenge through the present writ petition. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has read through the impugned order passed by the Director. As per the counsel, the Director has the power to cancel the resolution passed by the Panchayat on limited grounds as given in Section 199 of the Act. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has read through the impugned order passed by the Director. As per the counsel, the Director has the power to cancel the resolution passed by the Panchayat on limited grounds as given in Section 199 of the Act. As per this Section, the Director may, by order in writing, cancel any resolution passed by a Panchayat if, in his opinion, such resolution:- (a) is not legally passed; or (b) is in excess of abuse of the powers conferred by or under this Act or any other law; or (c) is contrary to the interests of the public or, likely to cause waste or damage of Samiti Fund or Zila Parishad Fund or of property of a Panchayat Samiti or Zila Parishad; or (d) on its execution is likely to cause danger to human life, health or safety or is likely to lead to a riot or affray.” 4. Before cancelling the resolution, the Director has put the Panchayat to notice and had also constituted a committee, which had gone to the spot and had itself carried out the inspection of the area of both the ponds, which were required to be connected. Primarily, it is because of tension in the village that a report was initiated by District Development and Panchayat Officer, Jalandhar on the basis of a report received from the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Phillaur to take this action. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that there are limited grounds available before the Director to cancel such a resolution, which is passed in public interest. As per the counsel, the Director himself has not made a mention whether this resolution was required to be quashed in the public interest. The Director, in my view, has passed a detailed order. He has given reasons for which he thought it appropriate to cancel this resolution in exercise of his powers under Section 199 of the Act. If there is a tension in the village, it ought to be attended to and can not be ignored. It will be in public interest to attend to that tension. The Director has taken action after first satisfying himself by getting the issue enquired into by constituting a committee. If there is a tension in the village, it ought to be attended to and can not be ignored. It will be in public interest to attend to that tension. The Director has taken action after first satisfying himself by getting the issue enquired into by constituting a committee. The reason, which has weighed with the Director to cancel this resolution, is that the area of the pond from where the water is going to be connected to another pond is more than the pond with which it is required to be connected. The present pond where the water is allegedly over flowing is existing in the area measuring 10 kanals 13 marlas, whereas this pond is being connected to another pond, which is only in an area of 7 kanals. It is also noticed that some portion of the pond where water is over flowing has been illegally occupied and that is why it is also noticed that the area of the pond which is so illegally occupied should be got vacated so that over flow of the water can be checked. The order passed by the Director is well considered and is informed of reasons which would show that it was and is in public interest to intervene in the matter to avoid an ugly situation of tension in the village. No cause by this court is made to interfere in the order passed by the Director. 6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.