^f^/M^' -sa IN TOIE HIGH COUP.T OF JUDIC&TUH& AT JABALPUR •19RIT PBTITIOH TSOr('SiQ"] OF 1999 BETu'iEEK Shyam Lal S/o Nathu Lal Patel, aged about 34 year Ex.Panchayat Sachiv at Gram Panchayat Gharghodi, r/o "'"illage Gharghodi, tShsil Gharghoda.DJLstrict Raigarh (I4P). PETITIONER AND Sarpanch, through Gram Panchayat Gharghodi Tahsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh • Sub Divisional Officer,Gharghoda, District Ralgarh (l'-1P)« r\, RESPOiroEi-TTS WRIT PETITION UMDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE- CONSTITUTION OF IHDI& ^ •-<a.w»_ HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 4807 of 1999 Petitioner Versus Shyam. Lal Sarpanch, through Gram Panchayat Gharghodi and anofher Single Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotrt. Shri Shailesh Ahuja, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.N. Bhakta, Advocate for fhe respondent No. 1. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Paael lawyer for fhe respondent No. 2. '~;^~?S'ci:-;i'' ORAL ORDER (lldlMay,2006) Learaed couiisel for the petitioner submlts that the petitk>ner has filed fhis petition. under Article 226/227 of Uie Constitution of India chaUenging the impugned onler dated 12.10.1998 (Annexure P/l) on the ground fhat tiie service of the petitioner was terminated without issuing show cause notice and without holdiag proper eiiquiry. The respondent No. 1,/Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Gharghodi, who has passed the impugned order, has admitted siibmissiou of the petitioner in his reply in fiiUowuig teraas :- That, the petitioner was reiuoved from. the post of Paachayat Kamii/Secretery, order issued by fhe fhen Sarpanch Graui Panchayat, Gharghodi, District Raigarh (C.G.). It is pertinent to niention here that before renioval of services of fhe petitioner no show cause uotice was issiied to the petitioner. It is also adinitted position in this case no euqiiiry was conducted accordiag to Pancliayat (Discipfase and Appeal) Rules, 1999, as per present record avaflable to ffae piesent respondents, petitioner does not fiiid aay such proceedings wifh the record. The presentGratn ^ 3 ^y^::3- Sabha vide rcsolution dtd. 28. 1.1999 also recominended fhat ftie petitioner be reappointed agaia as Panchayat Kanni/ Secretary." The i^spondent No. 1 has clearly stated fhat fhe Gram Panchayat has decided to reappoint fhe petitioner on fhe post of Panchayat Kanni/Secretary iii view to the categoricalty subinission inade by tfie respondeat No. l. Accordhig to learacd counsel for fhe petitioner, grievance of fhe petitioner has been redressed. For tlie reasons stated-above, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge \