IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA C.W.P. No.78 of 2003 Date of decision: 18.8.2008 Tilak Raj ....Petitioner -Versus- Surinder Singh and others ….Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta,Judge. The Hon’ble Mr.Justice V.K. Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No For the Petitioner: Mr.Ajay Dhiman, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr.A.K. Vashista, counsel for R-1. Mr.R.M.Bisht, Dy.A.G. for respondents No.2 to 4. Deepak Gupta, J.(oral) This dispute relates to the post of Panchayat Sahayak in Gram Panchayat Sudli. The petitioner Tilak Raj and respondent No.1 Surinder Singh both claim that they have been duly appointed as Panchayat Sahayak in the said Gram Panchayat. Tilak Raj had filed a complaint to the Sub Divisional Collector, Bhattiyat at Chowari against the appointment of Surinder Singh as Panchayat Sahayak. The Collector vide his order dated 19.5.2000 allowed the complaint and came to the conclusion that respondent No.1 Surinder Singh is not a bona fide resident of Gram Panchayat, Sudli. It is however clear from the order that this complaint was not treated as an appeal and no notice was ever issued to Surinder Singh before passing the said order. 2 Surinder Singh challenged the said order by filing O.A. No.2196 of 2000. Tilak Raj was proceeded against ex-parte. Surinder Singh in his O.A. had made an averment that he is a permanent resident of village Uled, P.O. Sudli and attached a certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat, Sudli in this regard. Since the State admitted this to be correct, as being a matter of record, the Tribunal without holding any further inquiry into the matter held that Surinder Singh was in fact a resident of Gram Panchayat, Sudli and therefore set-aside the order passed by the Collector on 19.5.2000. Tilak Raj aggrieved by the order of the learned Tribunal filed the present writ petition. In this writ petition, both the parties have attached documentary evidence in support of their respective claims. The question whether Surinder Singh is a resident of the area falling within the limits of Gram Panchayat Sudli is a question of fact. Unfortunately, before the Collector Surinder Singh was not present and as far as the learned Tribunal is concerned Tilak Raj chose to absent before the said Forum. Therefore, both the orders have been passed in the absence of one of the parties. Keeping in view the disputed questions of law involved in the case, we hereby set-aside the order of the learned Tribunal, and remand the matter to the Sub Divisional Collector, Bhattiyat who shall treat the complaint filed by Tilak Raj as an appeal against the order of appointment issued by the Panchayat in favour of Surinder Singh. The Collector shall give reasonable opportunity to both sides to put forward their case and thereafter decide the matter. It is hoped 3 that keeping in view the long standing dispute between the parties, the Collector shall decide the matter as early as possible and not later than 31st of December, 2008. Parties are directed to appear before the Sub Divisional Collector, Bhattiyat on 15th September, 2008. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. ( Deepak Gupta ), Judge August 18, 2008. ( V.K. Ahuja ), PV Judge