IN THE HEGH COUriT OF CI’IHé‘ITTISGAJLH AT BILikgPUl-i Writ Pe‘tition N/o. gléa of 2003. TXO UNDER eQRTiCLE,227 OF CONSTITU ION OF INDiwk PETIN Details of geti’tiogg 6m? o 11/, f PE’IETIONER : ggyildhan Ram son of Bahira Ram; aged abom 42 years, Sarpanch, Gram §anchayat Ghutgaon, District Jashpurr— N ag'ar’ (Chha‘tii sgarh) a WH$JS RFSPONDENTs : l. Chief Executive Officer f? Janp ad Panchaya‘h Farsabahar .g.) District Jashpur Nagar. / ‘ Q z" z" r #5 4"}! Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) % i»g . o‘k ‘ x ‘w w ' Kunkuri Di strict Jashpur (C. G.) ° 3. Board of Revenue of Chhat‘ti/sga-rh Juhrough its member Bi imaegur. 226 & XIwHC—ZZ 7-5-2003 Shri H.B. Agrawal, Adv. for the petitioner. Shri Ranbir Singh, Govt. Advocate appears for the State. LA. No. 2 101/2003 for urgent hearing is allowed. The petitioner was Sarp ch and he Wasrrcmovcd from ndent No. 2 the Sub—Divisional Officer. He preferred appeal and the Additional Collector, . Jashpur, granted stay vide ’ the oti‘lce of Sarpanch by res xure P—6. However, the said appeal was dismissed on 4-4-2003 against which, the petitioner filed revision along th application for stay before the Commissioner. During th pendency of the revision, the post of Commissioner was bolished and the matter was taken up by, respondent No. 3, the Board of Revenue of Chhattisgarh where the matte is still pending. He filed copies of the order sheets from 2-5-2001 to 9— 12—2002 vide Annexure P- 10. It is submit d that though the matter Was taken up by the respondent o. 3, yet it has not decided the stay application since 22-5— 1 and even the record has not yetwheen ealled for, after a lition of post of Commissioner and the matter remained und cided till then. The application is pending since 22~5~200L Practically 1 year and 10 months have; been passed. The application ought to have been heard by the Commissioner where the \ a i \ - ye. \ e i 2 XI-HC-22 ‘ application was med. Order sheets Show that record was nnt The Court concerned, which was required m send the ecord, ought to have sent it. Non-sending the records in d e-time and delay in it gives no credit and causes delay in th administration ofjustice. Even otherwise after constitution f the Board, the order sheets show that allocation has not n done. If not done, it should be done immediateiy. This rt appreciates that there may be dithculty as the Board of Revenue has been newly constituted m the State suddenly State decided to abolish the posts of Com issioners in the State but nevertheless, matters which have not been heard even by Commissioner even on need urgent hearing. The difficulties, if any, faced by t e Board betaken up and solved by the Chairman and if there ’s any diificulty, it be sorted out by those who are concerned d this Court accordingly hopes that it will be done expeditio ' 1y. So far as the case in h d is concerned, in view of the facts and circumstances, records be requisitioned received in spite of reminde forthwith and non-sending e considered on administrative a side forthwith. The roster be prepared and if there is \ \ difficulty, the President, B \ thimself or allocate to other \ \ of Revenue may either hear son in such a way that the {113% his} . u e d s ' e o r Xi-HCvZZ W‘m WWW WWQ WW1? WW3? . .....xNWQQWJ w 200 mmmm WW‘EWMW %?3¥I‘?1=ra?r%¥r as in the opinion of this Court, matter is heard expeditiously the mattar regarding stay serve urgent hearing and be erably within 15 days from the copy of this order. It is open to 1e stay application immediately the situation warrant. It is tbr n in accordance with law. :n stated above, this petition is heard as early as possible p production/receipt of certifled the Presiding JQQgg c» Ymv to hear t1 or hear the matter tinally as him 'to exercise jurisdictic Subject to What has bet dispased of. Consequently, M.W.P. N‘ Copy to Board of Revem Certified copy as per ruln ( gw§xk>$tmu Rvh€n W QQNS‘ ). 7 18/ 2003 stands disposed of. le. Copy to State counsel. a u WWYLUL Sdl- / Fakhruddin J Judge [@éfaa