\ ^^ -c_^; IN THE HIGH COURT OF 3UDICATURE AT BILASPURV CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION No. 5c.3<? OF 2003 PETITIONER Versus RESPONDENTS / /^^ ...^" ^.^w larsingh, aged about 70 years, S/o Pran Singh, Sarpanch/Gram Panchayat Borgaon, PoiiceStation Dondi, Tehsil Balod,District Durg Resident of Durg (Chhattisgarh) 1. State of Chhattisgarh/ through the Secretary, Department of Panchayat & Rural Development, DKS Building, Mantralaya, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2; Collector, Durg/ / Distt. Durg (Chhattisgarh) 3. Additional Collector, Durg, Distt. Durg (Chhattisgarh) 4. Gram Panchayat Borgaon through the Up-Sarpanch, Village Borgaon,Dist.Durg (Chhattisgarh) 5. Sub Divisional Officer, Dondi Lohara, Tehsil Baiod, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) 6. Khilavandas Manikpuri, S/o. Jagdishdas Manikpuri, Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Borgaon, Tehsrl Balod, District Durg (Chhat.fe'i'sgarh) ^" (^ O' WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE <S? v ^ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA< .^> j4j CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC-22 3:^rw ^w^ ^^ ^^c^^^ <.^ m ^^ -<{Rm^ ^Ttt^}^ fa<nm^< _3S5s.^ W^^tT%W% fe|^<^F* 20ft3, ^R^'^^W^{?ct 16.07.2003 Shrl B.D. (5uru, counseifc Shri Ranbir Singh, ^ovt. ^ Heard both the counsei. Learned counsel for the made by respondent No.6, the after conducting the enquiry r|moved the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch by an iliegal order. before the Adciitional Collecto Officer. The learned Addit rejected and the appea! is like submits that if the stay is no-1 suffer irreparable loss. regard to the fGcts and circurr] that if the iearned Additiond <w^vr^t '^N^1^fe^ <m^$t< ^ ^^ %^ |r the petitioner. Idvocate for respondents 1, 2, 3 and 5. petitioner submits that on a comptaint Sub Divisionai Officer, Dondi, Lohara, However, the petitioner filed an appeal against the order of the Sub bivisional bnal Coilector has fixed the date for hearing of the Gppeai, howe^er, the application for stay has been y to take time. Learned coun^et further granted then the petitioner is likely fo Having heard the iearr^d counse! for the parties and having stGnces of the case, I am of the opinion Coiiector is directed to expedite the XI-HC-22 STr^T'^T Rirtlcn ^^ Sft*ftct» W^^ ^ >Gmo '3^T T<fRi<rt^ ^Tfl^t*r<&, T^<yii«y 3ff^?T '^5RF wmr^^N;" ""~"'""""""W'^7VR^ 2003, ^RS'^r" 3R^T '^ff^I ^f^a -2. hearing of the appeal itseif and the purpose of the petitione In the given circumstance directed to dispose of the appeal with law, as early as possibte, but Accordingiy, the writ petith Consequently, M.(W.)P.No.l stand disposed of. Parties are entitled for cer <^i<i{<^4»i *4tH<vff'^ fe^t <Rn^K ^3?TFsm^?r at appeal is disposed of then it wil! r. $, the iearned Additionai Coliector is filed by the petitioner, in accordance ^ithin three months from today; n stands disposed of. 344/2003 and I.A.No.6154/2003 also tified copy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge