IN THE HIGH COURT OF TUDICATURE AT BILASPUR W.P N0:. 2JSJ-, ^nn^ c^ PETITIONER BHAG BALI DHRUW S/'o Parasram Dhruw, Aged about 35 years Sarpanch, Grani Panchayat, Murra, Dist. Raipur, C -attisgarh. Versus RESPONDENT' : ^l. State of Chhfl.ttisgarh through and ^^^ .^ST^^ .-^0'.^^ ^•^'^ ^l'-^-^ !^'v &*•' •..> Chhattisgarh. The Additional Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. y •^f-"/^s: 'i^^A^ '-s^ •?"i' ^ ,^./, <.\," .y^/y .\'.'' ''•••—-^"^•s>..->: ^,':^^^^ '^»^a9 '::'^^.Q lp '•f'"!^'"'" 3. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Sri. Tulsi Ram Verma, S/o SukramVenna 5. Shji Kapil Verma, S/o Sonchand Venna Soth resident of Gram Murra, Dist. Raipur, Cl'uiattisgai''h. >a»--"^ VVri.1 Peution una.er Aj'ticle 226/227 of the Constitution of IndiaJOT ^ysuance 6f appropriate Writ, Writs, direction etc. T1i •lli: l^ "'.Lf: ll?:li;' 't^^ ilil:L. M Wl x XI-HC-22 '3^^(pn?ra, atiiwis, («twi«y ^^&A/b^Ufe *tlU<?lt *1<1*"^'' " ' Wl 200 ^. fcl'bitU" SlI^fTO 'fiFI^ailiSt ^RPft ^l] a^i 3lK<[«<n«Rflfsri fiWtctll-l *IW<"ii 4 feA l!"i«SK ^rsRpgqsii^r 19-12-a002 Sbri Manindra Sbrivastava, Sbri Ranbir Siagh, G.A. for Shri Kishore Bhadiui, COT.UIS Heard. iounsel for the petitioner. t^ie rcspondents No.l, 2 & 3. ;1 for the respoadents No.4 & 5. Sarpa|ich Tfae petitioner was ffae Vikas Khand, Tilda &• Distt. Raij aUegations aa enquiiy was held( renioval froni fhie office. The agaiust the order of the coiapetent) No.2 - Additional CoUector, RaipT-uf ofthe coiapetent authority. Aj approached fhis Court for relief. grie^ed of Gram. Panchayat, Murra, »ur and on fhe basis of sonie which ultimately led to his loner had preferred an appeal aufhority before tiie respondeat •, who refased to stay fhe order fherewith fhe petitioner has Rehriag on ftie decisions Panaaaaad Daugi Vs State of M.P Law Joumal 1999 (2) 722 8s Raja |;ui the case Kailasli Kuniar aad ofhers ofreported ia M.P. SaLSinghVsStateofM.P. and Coukt others reported in M.P. ,High counsel for the pctitioner irupugned order proper opportuiiit^ nor fhe copy of the \ enquiry petitioner, fhough fhat has been authoritv. Under fhe facts and circ lower Court was not justificd iu not subdlits tt reptirt Today 2000 (1) 490, leamed that before passiag fhe of hearmg has not been given has been supplied to the jrelied upon by the coinpetent [uDistances, it is stated that the staying the inipugned order. [q»^^ XI-HC-22 an^iW ft'11* 9^ il'tKB ttt6(t ^ashai^ -tl/NY 'TSS'fWScn, s?tfl4t>td, Ptt'ft'K^ *tl*te<l Atldt SH^Ttl^q? .^.f..TJ°.^.^!ai..la^ 2W Adraittedly, fhe order of resolution of Paachavat and subs passed askuig.fhc Up-sarpanch Sarpanch. In view of the Itmited iisefiil purpose woutd be served ii can be disposed of at tlie ac apprdpriate orders. The learQed State counsel have no' objection stage. rejfaoval has been passed and vide •queiifthereto an order has been to dischar^e fhc duties of the Iprayer inade ia this petition, no 4 keeping it pendiag, as the same |inission stage by issuance of coiuisel for the petitioner and y tfae petition is disposed at this ut In the above vicw ofthc direcfing the respondeat No.2- and dispose of the appeal at aa e that in fhe ineantune fresh not be held aad the Up-i dischargc the dutics of the ofiice so. inatter electiobs -sarpa^.ch With the above observation; Consequently M.W.P. No. 1257/^002 No.7043/2002 for urgenthearmg| Certi&ed copy as per Rules. iit'Svmli •wwS'it fa'S <ftH{K ^T'Awaifet iatter, thc pctition is disposcd o£by A^ditioaal Collector, Raipur to tiy ;$rly date aud it is furtfaer directed for the post of Saq^aach shall who has beea directed to [sf Sarpanch shatl coatinue to do [, tbe petitiou staads disposed of. for iaterun relief & I.A. ^re also staad disposed. Sd/- P.C NAIK Judge ^ ''•A