^^^'-^^^ er""'^ ^ .„ ?FJy ^n^T'^T'^w ^41 3H^T '^11'^' 'S^ ^t^lcrl^, yTi1<H<|(o, fsldl'y^-!. '"^ 200 •-^T^T (^I^^f) ?;CT^^^.ant?r (Sinol®Bench: Hon'bte Mr. Justtc®Dhirendra Mlshra) X- (Petition U/A ^26 of Constilution of India) Petitloner Bh<|igwat Prosad Patel, 5/o Shri F^xme^iwar Patel, Aged about 34 years. Village- Jajjinipali, P.S. Kartala, District Korba. Prajsad Vs. Respondents 1. 2. 3. Present: Mr, D.K»Swain, Advocate for Ms. Sunvta Jain, Panel Lawyer W^{€\^ ^T^ H^TT^T, Jt^-li<J!ic{ —FS/{97—3/2008 —40,000. 22.9.2008 With the conoent of 14< heard finally. By this petition under | petitioner has impugned the rcspnnrlpnt Nn?-r»opirtyMfelctor, Panch^ "eb6^?^<fl<!1 'RT^ff ^* f^S <Fs<^s< '^>37fW3iT^T (s) No.5297/08 ^tate of Chhatl-i^arh, Tlirough the ^ecretary, Panchayat & Social Welfare ^epartment, b.K.S. Bhawon, Mantralaya, [|laipur (C©). "pie Deput/ Director, Panchoyat and ^odal Welfare Department, District- ICorba. ^arpoyich, Gram Panchayat, Jamnipali, l^artato, District Korba. tjhe petitioner. or respondCTts. orned counsel for the part-ies, the petition is Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the dort-ed 13.8.2008 (Annexure P-1) passed by yat & Social Welfare whereby the o^der powers of the Secretary conferred to the petitioner under Section 69 (1) of ^l^l^T^N^ ^iT^Tt^^^^ ^ST ^i<qici^, ^Ti1-(-f4i<o, I®|dl<(-<^< -^ 200 -^T^T ^^ (^f^^) ^^IW^^^I^l 6ntn the C.&. Pcaichayot Raj withdrawn. Leamed counsel for the| appointed as Secretary of Deputy Director in exercise of on 5.9.1995 and since then he ii conferred under Section 69 (| Panchayat Jamnipali has been 6rom Panchayat Jamnipali hcus) Panchayat Karmi, though no su^ &ram Sabha of firam been passed without any notice On the other hoyid, Ms. | the Stote cwtended that onl^ duties as Secretary has committed by the petitioner. remedy of appeal and revision Rules 3 <& 5 ofthe C.6. the petitioner has approache^l ah-ernflri-ive remedy available to| 1 to be dismissed for want of avalil Adhini^am, 1993 (for shorl" 'Adhiniyam') has been P<wchayot| Jamnipali be^n the Panchol/ot I haw heard learned coi ^T^fepft^ "RTR^ff "^ fe^ <P^^« '^3tR?H3^T ^\rw€\^^t^ —FS/197—3/2008 —40,000. petitioner djbmit$ thot the petitioner was Panchayat Jamnipali by respondent No.2- ^owers under* Section 69 (1) of the Adhiniyam dischargin9 his duties. However, his powws t) of the Adhiniyam as Secretary of 6rom v|rithdrawn on the ground thcrt- 6ram Sabha of removed the petitioner from the post of kh resolution has been communicoted by the t|Jamnipali to the petitioner and the order has l-o the petjtioner jjdn, learned c^insel appearing on behalf of powers of the pctitipner to discharge the withdrown wi account of ir'regularities petitioner is having statutory ah-ernfffrive jnder Stection 91 of the Adhiniyam read with (Appeal & Revision) Rules, 1995, however, this Courl- without availing the statutory him. Therefore, the instarrt- petitiw \s liable ilability of statutory altemative remedy. Inwl for tho pnn+i^< es;a^ L^^Sa, my"^ ^:^^/ ^ '^-:-..:^' ^"Sf ^Tpn^T, y>Ti1-(-i4l<o, f®ldl'^l|,< ^?^r^r^w ^mi^iT^T^^Nr '^ 200 ^?i^?^(-^f3^r) l^w^T^3Tr^r ~z- It is settled law that ex< c?i3^!<n<fl'f 'HR^f ^f fe^t <P^^K ^3tfm3T?^T However, writ petition should t\ slusion of writ jurisdiction due to availability of an alternative remedy is a i|ule of discrel-ion and not one of compulsion. ot ordinarily be entertained except where a very strong ca^e is made out fotj* depart-ure from the general rules. In the instant case, frorv that powers of the petitioner t^ withdrawn on cert-ain allegotior| right much less any constitutiwi) In that view of the mcrtl exceptional circumstance is sh^ and accordingly, the writ pe| reserving the right of the alternative remedy avdlable toj No order as to costs. perusal of the impuyied order it is observed discharge his duties as Secretary have been s mentioned in the impugned order. No legal al right of the petitioner has been affected. er, in the considered opinion of this Courfr no wn for entert-dning the instcmt writ petition t'ition is dismissed ot the admission stage petitiwer to take recourse to statutory him under the Adhiniycm. Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge ?1TW^P^ ?<T^T H^'^ l l^^, —FS/!97—3/2008—40,000.