•il ••'./ c^ <^v- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHATISGARH) W. P. NOP-B^S. OF 2003 PETITIONER Ajit Rain Sahu^S/o Dwarika Prasad Saliu, aged about 39 years; Occupafion—Service,' Presently posted Panchayat Karmi, Gram Panchayat Khapri [within jurisdiction of Jaapad Pahchayat Dondi Lohara, Tahsfl Dondi Lohara District Durg [Chliattisgarb] VERSUS RESPONDENTS .•/^* ^••^ ^'"cssy a^^^^: ».%^^^ State of Chhattisgarh thru' Secretaiy, Deparfanent of Panchayat & Rural Development, Mantralaya, DauKalyan SinghBUawan, Raipur [Chhattisgarh] CoUector, District [Gtilia.ttisgarlij Durg !•»' .••' ^ A» WRFT PETITION UNDER AETICLE 3. Oraai Panchaj'af, ;Khapn Ellapn,B16ck Dondi Lohara, Talisfl Doildi Lohara, Distt. Durg [Chhattisgarh] Through its Secretary. OF TH£ CONSTITUTIGN OF INDIA FOR ISSUANGE OF »RTT: IN'^MA'EURE QP (2S3CTIORARI, MANBAMUS.PROHIBmON AND OTHER.SUlTfiBEE WiyT OR WRTTS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS, ORDER OK ORDERS: XI-HC-22 sn^r^i R'ti.'b sn^i sb'Hi^ ^rfid '3^ •<<i<(i<yi<i, 8>q)'M<re,-I««nwy 3Tr^TTcRra? ^,......X*3i(2...'9.^&^..).^ 11*1(11 aitdth ~~r"""'"c'i''"'"y'r'"" 200 aii^TTCiraT^ltg ^^TCTA^Mi^T^l^'^Ti^^R ^TSTpOTSII^iI , S'nri Ashish ShrivsSTava, eoun^ei for the pe+i+ioner". ; Shri P-avin bas; P.L. for the S'l'ate/respondsnts. Heard both the counsel. I - The pe+itioner has preferred this petition under Artieie 226 ^f the Consfitutio" of India and the peti|tioner's petition is that he wdsdu'y appointee! as Panchsyat Karmi af ^ram Panchaya+ Khaprii. Oraer.forhis reraoval was oassed on 4-9-2000 by t'he Sarpanch of ©rarn-Panchoiyat. Thttt order was chaiienged befor-e the Hi^i Court of Madhya Pradesh irt W.P. N*o. 5488/2000 ond the Same was +r'onsflBr'red +o this 1-liqh Court and vide order' 14-3-2001 the order of removsl of t|ie petitioner was set-aside by the Cour-t and after- tht'ee months of that an.^9-6-2001 the Sram Panchdyat passed a "esolut.'on to Femove ^ths petitionerjfrom ths post of Pqnchayct Karmi. Ths oi"der being iSlegai, a meeting was h^ld on 3-7-2001 and in that meeting the earlier' fssolution of $pam Panchay<|it ciatsd 29 6-2001 wias approved. TTte peTitloner chatlengerf ThaT onjep b^fore fhe Sub BlvfsionGl Officen Dondl Lohara who vise order dQted 27-7-2|30l s.et-aside the opet-ation of the ordet' of iSram Panchayat andresolutiond^'t'ed 3-7-2001,. The Swpanch of the 6ram or'der dated 27-7-2Q01 before thel ordep .dated 22-12-2001 thereby) Pqnchayat fiied o rs/iaon against the Coliector and tlte Colleetor pqssed the the powers of the petitioner' were withdrawn- The petitioner filed an appe^al before Commissioner who vide prdsr ^^^^j 7'-.1=' ~^i\Jt f '"^.=E-2002 stayed the opepati [>n of fhe order of the Collectopand th. [Tft®'?n3^-- ..^1 XI-HC-22 ^^'::'ipiiyp[,'^ftwe;- iray 3TI^T~'q^ w«wiigiiict) "n 200 an^i^T h-f 31l|R( ^*l ^l^t: }-•\ [p appeai T.'naily decided by the Com.'ti Commissioner reroonded the niat+er" oppdrtuni'ty of hsarin^ was not givsrr t|3 him the order dated 22-12-2001 has b|e the stoy would continue. The Collector vide order dcted purguant +o +he Comwissioner's orderl Chief Executivs Officsr, Janpad Panchi^ ipecial ©ramSabhu meeting and uppr propsr opportunity of hear'infl +o the pe Aqainst the orderdated 22-7-3 an appeal before the Commissioner and CorRn'issioner refused to qrant stay vid< the petitioner; Against the brder of\ h^yat, before the Secr-stary, bepar'tnien+of of Chhattiagarh, Raipur. &ram Panchay) which the pefitioner* was, aqain removeij The petitioner challenged the same Janpad Punchayat;who stayed tiLie resoi| The iearned counsel forthe oeti- the. petltloner is pending before the. Se< Rural beveiopnient, nnnexure-P/12, directed to decjde the reyision at the ed SOIUT ^iNHA'i TI1Wff'? ?t <ra1«cK % aipgH sn^t iissioner on 30-4-2002 by which the to the Collector-by holaing that ths petitioner qnd.iwtthout heGring ien passed and it was directed that ,nd 22"° July 2002 passed a new order Idated 30-4-2002.and directed the ', to take. proper action by holdini "^priate decision be taken by giving fritioner. •2p02, The petitlone!' again pt-eferred which is stili p^nding. HQwever*, the order dated 12-8-2002 in fovourof Cofflfflissioner. a rsvision was, filed Ptinchaya+ A Rurai &evelopmeht, &ovt. oassed an ordep on 2-11-2002 by from the post QT Panchayot Kar'mi. ^sfore •f'he Appeliate Committee of oiption dated 31-10-2002. toner submitted that fhe r'evision of 4retary, Department of Panchayat & t^erefore, the fiovernroent may be •liest. ['^^fe^ --1-: XI-HC-22 T°3 -i11'lil<'f4, »ql<-i*iio,"I°«ii*ty an^ 'XRW 11WIT ShHiqi •^ 200 :"a§^]o^' SII^I'qiT ts-v'h sv^s ^qich ;^CT. Havinq heard the lear'ned counsei the faets cnd circumstances of the cas{ for the petitionsr is just and fair, ther^ Panchayat A Rural bevelopment, ©ovt.^ deeide the revision at the earliest a^ With these o.bservations, the wr| Consequently, M.(W.)P. No. 256) Fand disposed of. Par+iea Qrs en+i+ied for +he cer'tf <ftl*tlCT<ll T1 fll+«ll*Tf f«'<^^FaK^K iT'SlPtRTSn^I ' , tor the partie^ and hdVlrtg rtgtStld ¥o :, the request of the^tearned counsel ifore, the Secrstary, bepsrtmsnt of fChhattlsgarh, Ruipur is dir'ected to d not later than two months from i+ pe+i+ion is disposed of. '/2003 and I.A.No. 8397/2003 also fied copy of +he order. Sd/- LC Bhado.