HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. No. 3887 of 2004 Petitioner Chuman Si'ngh Sidar, son of Shri Shi'v Prasad, aged about 28 years, Panchayat Karmi {Sachfv), Gram Panchayat - Behramuda, resictent of viiiage Edukala, Tah. Dharamjafgarh, Di'stt. Rsigarh (Chhaffisgarh) Versus ResRpndsnts 1. Ths Sfate of QhhaWsgsrh. through : me Secreiary, Department of village Pancha>at and Rura! Deveiopment, Dau Kaiyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. The Dirsctor, Panchayat, Stats of C.G., Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3. TheCotlector, Raigarh (CG) 4. The Deputy Krector, Panchayat and Sociai Welfare Distt. Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 5. The Chier Executive OfRcer, Janpaa' Panchayat - Dharamjaigarti, Distt. Raigarh (CG) 6. Saipanch, Gram Panchayat Bshadamuda, Tah. Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh (Chhaffisgarh) ?B: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnshotri, J Shri A. N. Bhakia, Advocato for ihe petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Gwemment Advocste for the respondents No. 1 to 4. Shri Awadh Tripattii, Advocats for the Respondente No. 5 and 6. QRDER (Passed on this 21st day of March, 2007) The foitowing order of the Court is passsd by Satish K. AgnfhotR, J. 1. The petjfconer has fited this petitson, seeking a direction So quash Shs impugned order dated •{6.3.2004 (Annexure P/1), whereunder, fhe appointment of the petitioner, as Panchayat Secretar/, under Section 69(1) of the ChhstSisgarh Panchayst Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 has been withdrawn by the Deputy Dirsctor- Prescribeci Authority, Panchayat and Soci'a! Welfare.disfrict Raigarh. Ss '^iWf"1*-^ i na'KiiT . The contention of the petitioner is ftat by this order the petitioner has not been removed from ttie post of Panchayat Karmi. However, tte Gram PanchayaS is not permitting the pefittoner to work as Panchayat Karmi. ^ ^l^^s I'snr'-s^ E3's?»/*K'/ai?'af _ 0.aen/^?^?<!^i^t Mi"' ^ ?'sn?*ae^*?<f'''t;>4 •H^'rvM ii ^. iliw ^ctii^au f-<3iivnsiyctl, — f\^3^Viiyt;lll, JT|V,<^» iSplS&^iii,^^ ??H?'« St»f^*if4i'* Tpsy^-Q^^! fa.'^Ff^w./^ f^^f rr'^fs^'i.l !v* fhf y<»+iifrt ^*^*^» ,&+t*ia/<l W</i+**(^^<. f' i ftVifciUfi i lipelHiit i^diiit?w ^v^in^^i, iii iia i^i.Uiii iicii? SlctWU i.ilcii ^V u as She petitioner's ser/ice regarding fhe post of Panchayat Karmi is concemed thaS has been not terminated by the order impugned." i S^^!ff*^^f /*/>!f1^f*sS f^*" +t»A y^.Gii^^t^^^y^f' M^ •t? ;'•>•*'^fiy'f'e* rt^-t+ f+<^ ;n^i<*fri^*">/^^ »i i-^rtiit^v s/uuitDiSt ivi utvr is?0ik/^iius?tit ?T|i»r.^ 5(UUIiift.a Uisii, fciic ^sUUUaiitfl 's'i ^i<W ifl^n!-l)'if»^»^.i^ Dnv^^^.Mit/^t' L^."t »?i,iiiVtfvirviiiy da f-ciji^ijciyclt. PudiiUi. 4. ln v-sew of She categorical statement made by the respondent No.5, the pefitioner is enfitied to his satery as Panchayat KarmE for the period, he v/as resb-ained from the v/ork of PanchayaS Karmi, after withdravral of the assignment of She Sscretar/ vide order dated 16.3.2004 (AnRexure P/1), o". frse basis that ths petjfoner has been continuing as Panchayat Irf^.'^^fftXt? ixoiiifi. 5. jn view of ftat, the petitioner does not want to press other reiiefe with regard to quashing of the impugned order dated 16.3.2004(Annexure p/1). 6. Th 1 Ths respondent No.5 is accordingly directed to ensure thaf the petitioner is granted his salar/ on ttie post of Panchayat Karmi and he should conBnue to worit as Panchayat Karmi. 7. As a resu!{, this petition is altowed to the above extent. No order as to costs. nseqiiently, M(W)P No. 4295/2004 stands disposed of. f^firtf*£ \^VS 1S\ Sd/- satisttK. AgaShotri Judge