317^1 W K;-fi+ ^TS!TT 3^?T ?h+4 •¥' s^r •^{w\'fiii, vsT^vie, \^<^wy. ^...M.f?,.^..^.23.!^.^ 20,,, an^?r 'WK (licitl«<<iiT) '^cirax ^rf?g sn^r PETITiONER ag| Kij (Cl RESPONDENTS -Versus 1. 81 Oj ir <^I^<rf^ TnTRTf '^,fSTSt' •(:f<f^R ^aifgiTsn^r Srtit. Gautam Bai, Wife of Bisram Gond, i^d about 45 years, Resident of Village jnra, Tahsii Nawagarh, District Durg ;lG.) ate of Chhattisaarh. Through The ^crstary, Departmsnt of Panchayat and ticiai Weifare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur V1t.G.) 2. The Additional Collector. Bemetara, District nl ...n /n- r^\ u^iy ^•>-'-/ 3. Ttie Sub Divlsionat Officer and the Ptescribed Authoritv. Bemetara, District 4. The Secretary, Gram Panchavat Koonra, T^hsi! Nawagarh, District Durg (C.G.) (Writ Petition underAtticle 227 ofthe Constitution of India) Sinale Bench: Hd 17-1-2008:- n'ble Shri Justice L.C. Bhadoo Shri P.P. Sahu, counsel f<trthe petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents No. 1 to 4. i-1eard. The Detitioner has prefert-ed this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India auestioninal 29.11.2007 oassed bv iearned U the leaalitv and correctness of the order dated ipper Collector, Bemetara, District Durg (C.G.) —78 3rcT -^ww^, w-^wKa, Rfrii'y^ 2- l<l*4dl *t<|cb Wl: 200 sn^yr TR; (Tl?f3g^w) an^r ?!T R-tich 'cWT 'SH^T sh*lich ¥• ^dIWHfeT •3)1^1 ^raf^l^ i:FR^ff ^fs^ <f<it^i< ^ailwTsftei (Annexure-P/6) whereby learned Upjper Collector entertained the appeal filed by the petitioner herein but the stay EJpplication has been rejected. By consent of both the parties| Brief facts leading to filing o| herein contested for the post of Sarfl Durg. He was elected on that post irfl was made against the petitioner to| Officer), Bemetara, for illegality com| Inquiry was conducted against the notice was issued to her. Ultimately matter is heard finally forfinal disposal. f this writ petition are that the petitioner \anch of Gram Panchayat Koonra, District the year 2005. However, some complaint the prescribed authority (Sub Divisional |nitted by him in incurring the expenditure in an unauthorized manner and entbezzlement of the funds available under various schemes. 14 allegations w^re levelled against the petitioner herein. petitioner and based on that enquiry, a in view of the provisions contained under Section 40 of the Chhattisgarh Par|chayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "the Adhiniyam, 19^3") she was removed from the post of Sarpanch vide order dated 20.11.2Q07 against which the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Upper Collecljor, Bemetara. Even though the Collector entertained the appeal, the applicatijan for staying the effect and operation of the order passed by the Prescribed|Authority was rejected. Learned counsel further submitted that even the enqi<iry conducted by the Prescribed Authority was not in accordance with the pr<|ivisions of Section 40 of the Adhiniyam, 1993 and without affording any t)pportunity to the petitioner for cross- examining his witnesses, removal or()er has been passed. It is admitted position that the| petitioner is duly elected Sarpanch of the Village Koonra. It is settled law that f^ir conducting an enquiry under Section 40 ^3^*5^^ ^lA-73 ^?§^s^& "^^^^^. ^ % '" "3 S TSST •<<i<4i<?'><<, ®'J1y<i(S,fs|cliiyy<, ^' ^Wvt\ ^hWch W^ 200 3(i^?r tRH; (lyt-l«i<tr) 3)^'B?iTt5;ITO W 3)1^1 sfl^i'* p- fe^ 'renwdfei an^t |of the Adhiniyam, 1993, the Presc ^pportunity to adduce evidence in fa< Aggrieved by the same, peti |appellate authority has passed the in reasori, thereby as per Section 36 |has fall vacant. The Competent Aul |Sarpanch by holding election, if the is not decided in her favour then that |the petitioner. In the given situation |Upper Collecfor was of the view that ishould have stayed the order irt iexpeditiously. Therefore, without inte] iCollector, Bemetara, he is directed decide the same within a period of| copy ofthis order. ^lirf<yf*ilt tfffl^f^fe^ <f»i-^(? ^f affilT sii^r fibed Authority was required to give an ijour or against the charges. (ioner has preferred the appeal and the Ipugned order without assigning any valid f the Adhiniyam, 1993, post of Sarpanch (hority is authorized to fill up the post of slection is held and the petitioner's appeal lelection will be prejudice to the interest of |when appeal was entertained, if tearned appeal will take some time, therefore, he irr|pugned or appeal should be decided inte^fering with the order passed by the Upper to expedite the hearing of appeal and to |one month from the date of receipt of a Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge