»^: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition fd No.6403 of 2009 1. 2. Respondents Versus 1. 2. 3. 4. Raghunandan.S/o Ghashiya, ^ed about 48 years, Sahu by caste. Son Bai, W/o Resham Lal, Satnami by caste, aged about 36 years Both are resident of Village and Gram Panchayat Thakurdewa, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) State of Chhattisgarh, through Joint Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department of Chhattisgarh, Govt. DKS Bhawan, Raipur. Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Basanti Bai, W/o Paras Ram Dhruw, Ex.- Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Thakurdewa, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Sub Divisional Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) S.B : Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra. J. 6.11.2009: Mr. JS Baraik, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Bhaskar Pyasi, PL for the State. Grievance of the petitioners is that on complaint of the petitioners, proceedings under Section 40 of the Chhattisgarh PanchayatRaj Adhiniyam, 1993 were initiated against respondent No-3-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat- Thakurdewa, Tehsil-Masturi, Distt.-Bilaspur. Respondent No.3 was removed from her post by the Sub Divisional OfRcer vide order dated 3.6.2009 of Annexure P/2. However, appeal preferred by respondent No.3 was allowed by the Collector and the appellate authority setting aslde the order of SDO, remanded the matter to him for fresh enquiry after affording opportunity of hearing to respondent No.3. The petitioners preferred a revision before the Director, Panchayat, however, instead of deciding the revision expeditiously, the same has been adjoumed for 1.12.2009. In these circumstances, the petitioners have prayed for direction to the SDO to withdraw the powers of drawing and disbursing authority of respondent No.3 and to file report against him for misappropriation of Panchayat fund. After hearing counsel for the petitioners, considering that the revision preferred by the petitioners against the order of Coilector is pending before the Director, Panchayat, 1 am of the opinion that no such directions, as prayed for in the instant petition, can be issued. The petition is without any substance, the same desen/es to be dismissed at the admission stage itself and is, accordingly, dismissed. :^ Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge .r'