Chhabi la! Bhardawaj Slo- Disirici— Raigah (C.G.) Versus 1. State of Chhatu’sgarh, Through he Sectary, D.K.S. Panchayat hawan and Raipur social (CLGJ welfare department, 2. Districia The Collector/District Rarh (CG) Eiection Officer, i~a 3. Tahsikiar, Sarangarh, District- Raigarh (£16.) 4. The ecretary. Gram Panchat Goam, S av d B!ock sarangarh, Districtn Raigarh "‘ "J ‘VAJ Shn‘ F.S. Khare, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Alok Bakshi, Govt. Advocate for the State, on advane copy. ORAL ORDER (04.06.2098) m SUNIL KUMAR SIHA J. Heard on admissio. The petitioner is Up-Sarpanc Gra & Tahsil- Sarangrh, District- m Panchayat Godam, F’.S. Raiarh (C.G.). Presently, he is working w“«Neaxx‘ pending (P4) postpone till final before the decision election the Additionai of Program the appeal/application Coiiector. and date of voting (P-2) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR W.P.gC) No. 2941 of 2008 pETmONER r RE5PONDENTS t re B WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE INDIA 2?6I227 (IF THE CONSTITUTION OF Apgearance: c N n h of g a 2 ‘ _ W.P,(C) No.2941/2oos @ 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be piease to can for entire record, which relates to petitioner’s matter fer its kind perusai. 10.3 Any other reiief, which the Hon’bie Court deem fit and proper, may kindly be granted in favcur of the petitioner.” Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that if the elections are held according to schedule proposed, it shall cause various anomalies because the appeai against the order of removal of Sarpanch is pending before the concerned authority. He also raises many grievances. l have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and have also perused the records of the writ petition. Admittedly, the post of Sarpanch is lying vacant on account of his removal by way of no confidence motion and the program has been published for election to the said post. It is also admitted position that the said elected Sarpanch has raised no grievance against such action of the State and the grievance has been raised by Up-Sarpanch, who is'ofticiating as Sarpanch after removal of the concerned Sarpanch. ln such circumstances. there does not appear any substance either in the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner or the petition filed by the petitioner. lt appears that the petitioner any how wants to function as the Sarpanch and he is trying to defer the election by adopting means of filing writ petition which is not bonaftde. The petition for such relief(s) cannot be entertained, the same deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed at the motion stage itself. in View of the above, LA. No. 01 for grant of interim relief and stay, LA. No. 02 for hearing the case during summer vacation & LA. No. 03 for urgent hearing stand disposed of. IVA/”re/V“ f er 6d]- .Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge f