A- ^•F< HIGH COURTQECHHATTISGARHATBILMPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SHRISUNIL KUMAR S1NHA, J. Writ Petition (PIU No^071 of 2008 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Radhe Shyam Thavalt, S/o Late Rampyare Thavait, Aged about 46 years, Occupation Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Khokhra, Block Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa, R/o Village Khokhra, Block Janjgir, Distrtot Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh. Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Panchayat and Urban Development Department, Govemment of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Shastri Chowk, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Collector, Distt. JanJgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Janjgir-Champa, Distiict Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Navagarh, District Janjglr-Champa, Chhattisgarh. Writ Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India Present: Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents No.1 &2/State. ORDER (8th April, 2008) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Learned eounsel for the parties are heard on admission. 2. Petitioner - Radhe Shyam Thavait has filed this writ petition styled as "Public Interest Litigation" for the following reliefs: "10.1)The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records leading to the impugned notification dated 25th January, 2008 published in the Chhattisgarh State Gazette (Extraordinary), for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of certlorari quashing the notification dated 25th January,2008 published In the Chhatti^arh State Gazette (Extraordinary), and declare the same as void and inoperative. 10.3) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pteased to direct the respondents not to shift the headquarter of Btock Janjgir to any other place. 10.4) Cost of the petitlon may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.5) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems frt and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest ofjustice." 3. The petitioner, thus tn substance is seeking quashing of the Notification dated 25-01-2008 (Annexure P/10) whereby the headquarter of Block Navagarh has been changed from Janjglr to Navagarh. ^?3sraaa'a /y^, -^ '53sss". l >c^~ '^^ 4. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, leamed counsel for the petltioner referring to the first proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 127 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhlniyam, 1993 (for short "the Adhiniyam") vehemently argued that the Notification is bad in law as objectlons were not invited before Issuanee of the Notificatlon. Learned counsel further submitted that In the Notification tssued in the year 2004 under Section 3 of the Adhiniyam, Navagarh was shown as one of the villages in Janjgir Block. 5. Section 127 of the Adhiniyam reads as follows : "127. Alteration in limits of Block and Zila Panchayat.- (1) The (Governor) may, by notification change the headquarters of a block or alter the limlts of a block by including thereln any local area in the vteinity thereof or by excluding therefrom any local area comprised therein: Provided that no such notification shall be issued unless a notice signifylng such intention and inviting objections from persons likely to be affected by the alteration in the limits of the blocks by the date to be specified therein has been published in the prescribed manner and the objections received have been considered: [Provided further that no such notification to change the headquarters of a block shall be issued except to change such headquarters which exist outside the timits of the block to a place within that block.] (2) On the issuance of the notificatlon under sub- section (1) the (Governor) or the authority authorized by him may pass such consequential orders as may be necessary. y'c, ~\ < "• ''..••/•;.. ::^. i- ^; a> » ,S f ^tV" •^-. : '"'"-"' -rf'"' (3) On the alteratlon of the llmits of a dlstrict, the State Government may pass such consequential orders in respect of Zila Panchayat as may be nK;essary." 6. From the above quoted Section 127 of the Adhlniyam, it is apparent that Sub-sectlon (1) provides for alteratlon of the limits and change of the headquarters of a Block. The First proviso to Sub-section (1) mandates that where the limits of Block are sought to be altered, objections are to be invited and considered before issuance of Notification to that effect. The second proviso to Sub-section (1) prohibits issuance of Notification to change the headquarters of a Block. The only exception carved out is when the existlng headquarters of the Block are situated outside the Block the proposed change Is to shift the headquarters to a place within that Block. 7. According to the Notification of the year 1999 (Annexure P-2) Entry No.40, Item No.3, the Block shown in column No.3 is Navagarh and the headquarter of Block Navagarh as shown In column No.4 was Janjgir. As in the present case atteration of the limits of the Block was not contemplated, the first proviso to Sub-section (1) has no application. The seeond proviso to Sub-sectlon (1), permits issuance of Notlflcation to change the headquarter of a Block from outside the Block to a place within the Block. As the Notification dated 25-01-2008 contemplates shifling of the headquarters of Block Navagarh from Janjgir to Block Navagarh itself, it is fully covered by the second proviso to sub-section(l). '& '•w. •t 8. As the first proviso to sub-section (1) is not attracted in the present case, we do not flnd any substance in the above submission of the leamed counsel for the petitloner. 9. The writ petitlon, therefore, 1s liable to be dlsmissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. ^ 10. The security amount of Rs.5,000/- deposited by the petitioner be refunded to the petitior—— Sd/- Chief Justice subbu SdA ; SU^Ku^sin^ J 'e I