HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH: PET1TIONER HON'BLE SHRI JAGDISH BHALLA, Ag. CJ W.P.{C)No.S602of2007 Nand Kumari Sahis Sarpanch Gram Panchayat BEMACHA, Tahsil & Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) 1. 2. a A 5. 6. State ofC.G. Through Secretary Panchayat and Samaj Kalyan Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) Collector/Appeilate Authority Mahasamund Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) S.D.M. (Revenue)/Prescribed Authority Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) N.L. Sidar Co-ordinator Panchayat and Samaj Shiksha Distt. IVIahasamund (C.G.) F.D. Kurre Sub ordinator, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) Rajesh Chandrakar Up Sarpanch Gram Panchayat BEMCHA, Tehsil & Distt. Mahasamund • Wnt Petition ynderArtJcte 227 pfthe Constitution of India. Present: Shri Dinesh R.K. Tiwari, counsel forthe petitioner. Shri U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Advocate forthe State. 4r" Petitioner who is the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat was charge sheeted after enquiry vi/hich according to the petitioner is conducted withoutjurjsdiction by the h'vo enquiry officers, had filed an appeal after being aggrieved by the punishment of removal and imposition of ban to contest the election to the post of Sarpanch for a period of six years befo.re the CoNector which was rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition and according to the petitioner since the enquiry report is a voidable document, there is no provision of revision and the petitioner has a rigfit to approach this Court' directly. If this argument of the petitioner is taken to be true then the question crops up as to why petitioner had filed an appea!? This question could not be replied by the petitioner. ! find ihat there is provision of revision under Section 91 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993. Aecordingly, without 8%^^^^^^^^%®: s. availability of alternative remedy to the petitioner. Sd/- Acting ChiefJustice t^rule. J: