\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF 3UDICATURE AT BILASPUR, CHHATTISGARH ci^oA^ WRIT PETITSON No. 7&^ OF 2003 PETITIONER /Sudarshan Karsh, aged about 31 years, S/o Shri Sriram Karsh, resident ofviilage Machida, Post Padigaon, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) Versus RESPONDENTS •^ ^ A<S?^'sf .....>^?t ^" f^;^—-^.^ ,,/?T ^- ""•-^iA-^ i^ ,. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Panchayat, DKS Building, Mantralaya,Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. Collector (Panchayat), Raigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) |3. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) |4. Janpad Panchayat, Pusaur through its Chief Executive Officer, Pusaur, district Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ^-Gram Panchayat, Turanga, Block Pusaur, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Lvn^/ r-^- °^ ^ ""\; XI-HC-22 3TI^T^T f^TT^3T[^T ^TT^^cf $h^|ch 75? <rqiq|<nq, ^Tfl^^KS, fctcr(|^^< 311^1 ^5icb ^ll^dl sh^llch •—-•-----^ ^ 200 Icl-bo^ 3TI^?T ^TT^R: ^cT 21.9.2006 Shri S.R.J, Jaiswal, cojunsel Shri Anin Sao, Gov^ respondents 1, 2 aiid 3. Shri Sunil Sahu, coun^el None for respondent N| Heard finally with tlie Order dictated as follo^s: The petitioner, who| Paiichayat Kaniii of Grai|i Raigarh and was later on[ aforesaid Graja Paiichayat (C.G.) Panchayat Raj legality oforder dated 30,14 appouitnieiit/declaration foif Grain Panchyat has been| CoUector, Raigarh, District-I^ The submission of le4 that since the appouitnient the Pachayat Kaniii Yojna Secretajy of tlie Gram said Act, his ser^ices wer^ M.P.(C.G) Panchayat Servicje chi^T^41Ti w^ ^ te^ <[^i^i< ^3Tf^T3TT^T unsel for the petitioner, ^mnient Advocate for the State/ for respondent No,4, o.5. "onsent ofthe parties. ORAL ORDER (21.9.200S) was iiiitialty appouited as a Panchayat, Tiiranga, District- declared as a Secretary of tlie timder Sectioii 69 (1) of the M,P. Adhi^iiyani, 3.993, has cliallenged the ^003 (Annexure P"9), by which, his the popt of Secretaiy of the said caiicell^d by respondent No,2, Jaigarh. Inied counsel for tbe petitioner is |of the petitioiier was made under fiirtlier he was declared as the Pancjhayat uiider Section 69 (1) of the wer^ govenied by the provisions of (Disciplme and Appeal) Rules, abd XI-HC-22 3TR?T^)T f^TW3TT^T ^TW^f?cr ^ 3^ ^WM^, ^Tfld'KS, i^diy^< 311^^1 ^l^lcb ^i^^ii $h^n^ •"—-------- ^qr ( 200 f^^ [ttS) ^T^T^RTT^^f fl^ 1999, His ftirtlier STibmiss foUowmg fhe procedure laid c Rules, psssed fhe impugned, in the eyes of law. Referring to tlie dec| Prakeish Chctndra. Patel wrf^frr w^ft'^-'tec^t^RR ^^rf^T3:n^T ton is tliat the Co11ector, without lown uuder Rule 7 ofthe aforcsaid order, which cannot be szistained Isioii rendered iii the matter of ^s. Stote of ChhcrtttsGcirh an.d Qthers, reperted in. 2004 ^CEW Tivnes fC.G.) Pes.143 and tiie Division Bench decision o 1SS6/2004 and anotlier cj W.P.No.2356/2004, leame^ F this Conrt, passed in W.P.No. [ecision passed l^y this C<onrt in counsel for the petitioner snbmits that the case of the petitio|tier is sqxiai-ely covered under tiie |e oider impugned deseives to be ithe memo dated 8.10.2001, issued aforesaid decisions aiid tli quashed, He also refers to by the State of Chhattisgaj-h to all the Collectors aiid all the been clearly stated that tlie cases of Pajichayat Karmis] Chief Executive Officers of l})istiict Panchayats, iii wliich, it has Rules of 1999 are applicable in the aiid any discipliiiaiy action agaiiist them caiinot be taken wiljhout followmg the pi^ocedurcs laid A copy of this meiao is filecl as down iinder tlie said Riile Annexure P-2. Leamed couusels foi Chief Executive OfRcer alscj is covered by the above decj j allowed, It is disposed of the State as well as counsel for thc agree tliat the case ofthe petitioner lisions offhis Conrt. Iii flie facts and circ^mstajices ofthe case; the petition is bn the tenns of tJie oixlera passed m XI-HC-22 W^T^T f^ri^^n^r $b^icb^ri??f sunita " Vf/ 3FST -^I^M^, ^Tfl<141^, [®<cni^< ^ q^ch til^dlSb^l* '""""4'"''"4" " ^ /200' tcl^ 3TT^T ^cTTW^T^T ^ ^s shAll the above wsit petitions]. 30.1.2003(Annexure P-1) p^ quashed. The petitioner consequence ofquashuig of However, ifso require^ to initiate appropriate petitioner, which shaU be Rules referred to above. There shaUbe no oixle^ The impugned order dated issed by the Collector is hereby be entitled to all the benefits in (he impugned order. tfae State authorities shall be free proc^edmgs iinder the law agaiast fhe ^ovenied by the provisions of the 4)I^Id41-l W^ff^ ^6 ^R^R ^3Tf^T3Tr^T -./• as to cost. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge (^^f^)