HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ?M»Q^^271No.J?»6of2GM]« PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Smt Tahira Parveen, W/o Jafar Ali., Aged about 50 years, Sarpanch, R/o Village Narayangarh, Tahsil Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). VERSUS 1, State of Chhattisgarh, througli the Secretary, Panchayat Department DK8 Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 2. The Director, Panchayat Department, DK8 Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 3. The Collector, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). 4. The Sub Divisional Officer/Prescribed Authority, Dongargarh, Distt. RaJnandgaon (CG). 5. The Tahsildar Dongarhgarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). 6. Narottam Joshi, S/o Shri Chabbi Joshi, aged about 35 years, Up-Sarpajnch, Village Panchayat Narayangarh, Tahsil Dongargarh, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONS'munON OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present Shn P.R. Patankar Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate General for the State/respondent No.l to5. Shri 8.S. Rajput, Advocate forthe respondent No. 6. ORALORDER ith (Passed on 10m day ofNovember, 2008) Withthe consent ofthe parties, the matter is heard finally. 1. Leamed pounsel appearing for tiie petitioner submits that the petitioner is elected Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Narayangarh, Tahsil Dongargali, District Rajnandgaon (CG) in an election held in the year, 2004. Qn the basis ofcomplaint made by Up-Sarpanch ofthe same Village Panchayat (respondent No. 6), the Sub Divisional Ofticer, Donsarhgarh (for short the SDO'), by order dated 13.08.2008 (Annexure P/6), removed the petitioner from fhe post of Sarpanch under the Sahu provisions ofSection 40 (1) (b) (c) offhe Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short 'tfae Adhiniyam'). It was fiirther directed to recover a sum ofRs. 1816.27/- fi-om the petitioner. 2. Being aggrieved, fhe petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector, Rajnaiidgaon. In the pending appeal, the petitioner made an application for grant of interim stay. The Collector, having heard and examined the case, by order dated 25.08.2008 (Annexure P/8), rejected the application and declined to grant stay ofthe order passed by the SDO. 3. Further, being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a Revision before the Director, Panchayat. The Director, Panchayat, alfirmed the order passed by the Collector, and rejected fhe revision on 27.08.2008 (Annexure P/10). Thus, this petition. 4. Shri S.8. Rajput, leamed counsel appearing for the respondent No. 6 aiid Shri Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State, Jointly submit that interest ofjustice would be sub-served ifthe Collector, Rajnandgaon, is directed to decide the pending appeal e^qpeditiously. Shri Patankar, counsel for the petitioner has also no objection if the Collector, Rajnandgaon, is directed to decide the pending appeal, on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible. 5. I have heard leamed counsel appearing for the parties, pemsed the pleadings and documents appended thereto. The contention of leamed counsel appearmg for other side deserves acceptance. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Collector, Rajnandgaon, to consider and decide fhe pending appeal, in accordance with law, on its own merits, within a period ofeight weeks from the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order. No order asto costs. 7. Interim relief granted on 09.09.2008, stands discharged. Accordingly, I.A- No. 3, application for urgent hearing, also staads disposed of. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge