t\^^ c>( HIGH COURT OF CHHATTJSGARH AT BJLASPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram : HON'BLE SHRi RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRS SUNSL KU1V1AR SINHA, J. Writ Appeal No. 162 of 2008 Petitioner Uma Shanker Niraia, S/o Shri Sant Ram, Aged about 36 years, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, BIIalgarh, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS liiiiiirnL. Versys 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Secretary Panchayat And Sociai Welfare Development Department, D.K.S. Bhavvan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.). 2. Specified Officer / Sub Divisionai Officer (Revenue), Bilaigarh, Dlstt. RaJpur(C.G.) 3. Gomti Bai W/o Radheshyam Shriwas, Aged about 40 years 4. Amrika Bai W/o Shyam Lal, Aged about 35 years 5. Siya Ram, S/o Kartik Ram, Aged about 37 years, Up-Sarpanch, Biiaigarh 6. Anup Bai Jaiswal W/o Tika Ram Jaiswai, Aged about 30 years 7. Bhoj Ram Jaiswal S/o Mudiya Kalar, Aged about 42 years 8. Suman Devi Agrawai W/o Sudesh Agrawal, Aged about 35 years 9. Bodhin BaJ W/o PunJ Ram, Aged about 43 years 10. Harmendar Singh S/o Tejaswi Pratap Singh, Aged about 36 ^5S^S> years. 11. Peer Khan S/o Amir Khan, Aged about 40 years 12. Gorelal S/o Late Kartik Ram Khutte, Aged about 43 years 13. Naresh Kumar, S/o Ishwari Dewangan, Aged about 26 years 14. Ram Kumar S/o Shatrughan, Aged about 37 years 15. Shiv Lal, S/o Ram Dayai Sahu, Aged about 40 years 16. Urmila Devi, W/o Baharta Sahu Aged about 42 years Respondents 3 to 16 are R/o Viilage Bilaigarh, Distt. Raipur Writ Appeai Under Section 2(1) of the Chhattisaarh Hiah Court (Appea! to Dlvlslon Bench) Act. 2006 Present: Shri H.P. Agrawal; learned counseS for the appeilant. Shri N.K. Agrawai, jeamed Deputy Advocate Generai for the State/ respondents No. 1 and 2. Shri Rajesh Pandey, iearned counse! for respondents No. 7 and 11. Judgment ( 4th August, 2008) The foliowing judgment of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, CJ.: Learned counsei for the appeiiant Is heard on admission. 2. Appellant - Uma Shanker Nirala has fifed this writ appeal against the order dated 28.07.2008, passed in VV.P.(C) No.4072/2008. r .^s£SKf^ '^ l^J '^ ^^.-^ ^ ^"•s •y" ••••*-'• ,»"y @> m, 3. The appeliant/ petitioner fiied the writ petition for the followlna reiiefs: "10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindiy be quash the procedure of the no confidence motion. 10.2 That; any other suitabie reiief may aiso be granted. 10.3 That.. the cost of the petition may aiso be granted." 4. The appeiiant/petitioner thus in substance was seeking quashing of the proceedings reiating to the 'No Confidence Motion' to be considered in the meeting to be heid on 29.07.2008. 5. Learned counsel for the partles do not dispute that in the meeting held on 29.07.2008, the motion of no confidence was passed against the appellant. 6. Shri H.P. Agrawai, iearned counset for the appeilant fairiy conceded that the appeliant has raised a dispute before the Competent Authority under the provlsions of Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 and the same is pending for consjderation. Learned counsej submitted that the observations made by the leamed Singie Judge in the impugned order are bound to influence the declsion of the Competent Authority. 7. As the appeliant had already raised a dispute against the passing of motion of no confidence against him in the meeting heid on 29.07.2008, we deem it quite unnecessary to examine the issues raised by the appeilant in the writ petition and the present appeai. •1 -^^ c^ 8. VVe, however, deem it proper to observe that the Competent Authority shali decide the dispute raised by the appellant; in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order. 9. With the above observations; the writ appeal stands disposed of. Subbu Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge