INTHEHI61-ICOURTOFJUDICATUREAT^BILASPUR CHHATTIS6ARH PETTTEONER ^ <^' <^"i;' '^^>" (&; ^^- RE^PONDENT 1. v W.P. N0. S&'ZO 72004 Khol Bahera Sahu, S/o.LaTe Dharamlal Sahu, aged about 51 years, R/0. Village - Hardi; Sar-panch Incharge ( at Present UP- Sarpdrich) 6ram Panchayqt-Hardi (Jarve) DeVelopment Block, Tahsil- Akdltdra. Distpict.JanJgir-Champa(C.6.)' VER5US Stateof ChhqttiSgarh Through Dir'ector (Panchdydt)i Raipur • ::'1..'..; , . :" ; ;,:,'/;1 ' " : , ' ':; Collector • . ;. . Distr'ict- Janjgir - Champa Stib - Bi\?iao!idl officer 'l;!:"?;'-»«.'£-''i^'y .'•a ^". • (Revenue) Distr'i<:tte;'£Fanjgir- Champa Sdmarin Bai (At Present - Temporary Sarpanch) 6ram Panchayat -Hardi, Akaltara, Distriet Jartjgir- Champa (C.©.) WRITPETmONONDER ARTEGl.ES 226 AND2270FTHE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA (1) PARtICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS : The petitioner is Scfme as aboye in the cause title. (2) PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS :- - Particulars of the reSponGlentsaresameasabbvein the causetitle. I ti; i?^^ a'= 's^!^K^t.iaa=iEieei!Bin)®jii^ffl ^,iadjautaB^ B XI-HC-22 aii^t^f h-u'h aii^si a)*liq> ^rf^t •ssg^BinsRi.'s^S^fa'ni'yy , i, 3n^:''li^ _^lj,, j LO'?P'(OoT^o^o;fo>-( *U*<CTIwii'i*'"""" ""'~'~~~~"~~"^f^--yiy • ' Rl'tx^t "~^'" •sri^i staisK ^ft?ci 21.9.; thls Shri Gurudev Sharan, counsel 9 Shri Sanjay • S. Ayscwal, Cj respondents No. 1,2 and 3. .' The petitioner has preferred 227 ofthe CotKtitution ofladia, beingl (Annexure P-I) passed by':the. D^ N0.225/A-89/2003-04. -' . The main grievance of the Sarpanch on the ground Of having n| appointed date, the'petitioner, being l^ was looking after the cfaarge of of the Panchayat was convened, hov| Panchavat was not complete. therefo^ pet|t Ub Sarpa|ich fresh date was fixed m that meeting. petitibner, meetmg;was fixed on 21'.6. was not complete, even then responc against the casual vacancy against before the CoUector md the Collecto: that order, respondent No.4;moved before him. The Director, Panchays respondent No.2 and passed the impus before the.Collector and he is not deeidi I have heard leamed counsel <t>wfct4-t*tW«'iE'?(s'<3<I«RsiK '^'iitttW^aii^H . ir the petitibner. ; ovemment Advocate for the State/ writ petition under Articles 226 and aggrieved by the ocder dated 24.8.2004 rector, Panchavat in Revision Case pet|tioner is'that after removal of regular |ore than two living children after the. )-Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat: Hardi, Thereafter, on 14.6.2004 meeting tever on that day,l the quorum of the {e, the meetmg w^ adjoumed and no Iflowever, abmptly, without notice ofthe .P004 and on tHaf day also the quonim |ent No.4 was appointed as Sarpanch wluch the petitioner'preferred an appeal issued stay. However, aggrieved by the pirector, Panchayat by nling a revision jt, set aside the stay order passed by ipu^ned order. Now, the appeal is pending libgit. . fbr pie parties. ; \ •1-1: >• XI-HC-22 ^53 ^FIISRIL'S^S'ISi ftwi'uy 3n^?TTra^ _^ _ Y ^, ^:P.'(OO.^O-T-° 1 0*^ '"""""'"^ 200 HINCTI a»*ii<*> Isre^' 311^1 W f<;lich oil^t S0*l tllsfl Soma/Sumta ^f 1^1 3B^r^<n^< •yl?a -T. — couitel Having heard the leamed Ithe facts and circumstances ofthe cast the appeal offlie petitioner wifhin aj receipt ofa eopy ofthis order. With the aforesaid direction, thd' In'view ofthis order, M.(W.)I|. alsp stand dispbsedof Parties are entitled for certified (fopyoftliis order. <tirid4fc't ^m^^ ^^ ^w^w., %'31&PT^3IlS?l for the parties and hayitig regard to s, respondentNo.2is dh-ectedto decide period of ohe morith from the date of petition stands disppsed of. .No.2679/2004 and I.ANo.6558/2004 Sd/- LC.Bhadpo " Judge .['Tft^'^§l^