@ @ QQw'oV/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIsGARH AT BILASPUR /CG WRIT PETITION ho. Mg [2095 PETITIONER ‘Smt. Shanti Thakur, wife of Shri V/“Roopnath Thakur, aged about QO " years, Sarpanch, gramknchayat Charama, Distt. Chhattisgarh. VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through : Principal Secretary, Department pf Gram Panchayat, Mantralay, /" Raipur, Chhattisgarh. / \ . The Collector, District Kanker, ‘ Chhattisgarh. ‘ ‘ 3. Sub Divisional Officer, Kanker, i Chhattisgarh. 4. Smtn Mamta Sahu, I Gram Panchayat Chgra'ma, Distt. Kanker, Chhattis/garh. EETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFm INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF ZMAMNDAMUS CERTIORARI ORDER OF THE WRIT OE LIKE : NATURE. . ‘ ' P‘ / - i‘ _ Q ig W [‘fl% W51 1 mac-22 ~ - wjlgbiw /€)3 Wm W zoo mmww§fgram mqfanm in 2002 (2) C.G.L.J. 57, on 13-: passed by the Sub—divisional Of before the Collector and the Co proceedings of appeal on 24-4- 003. There was no direction ppeal contended counsel for for staying the proceedings of the parties. 3-2003 staying only the order ticer. The order was produced ector has stayed the complete )mitted that let the appeal be 4. Counsel for the parties su' heard on merit and during heal may be allowed to continue wl r5. Bai (supra), this Court has note decided the matter. *.\ the judgment is relevant and qubted below:— It is noted that while deali in’g period of appeal, the stay 1g with the caSe of Smt. Rani d the relevant provisions and / W; Paragraph 22 of “Counsel for the parties ubmit that powers have been conferred on the S te authorities under the M.P. Panchayats (Appeal d Revision) Rules, 1995 to decide the matters like resent, but the manner in which they are exerci d as reflected from the orders passed by the Sub—Divisional Ofiicer, [11%W Additional Collector and 1 Show that propér training to- these authorities to pé functions in accordance W by the Sub-Divisional Off of Section 40 of M.P. Pé person holding such offid the public life of a persd such power by these aq matters of appeal and evision requires proper understanding of law kee natural State has justice local body such esti tr Municipal Corporation, Ml and so forth and the dispu arise and travel to such l imparting such legal educi‘ jusliliably perform the qi aecordance with law so :he commissioner goes to is required to be imparted rform such quasi‘judicial ith law. The order passed leer under the provisions nchayat Raj Adhiniyam, but casts a stigma on >n. Therefore, exercise of thorities in hearing the ing in mind principle of ling is required because lishments of Panchayats, micipal council and so on tes like present may often iuthoritics‘. Therefore, by ation, the authorities can lasi—judicial functions in at no prejudice would cause to any body in a d mocratic set up. It must be observed that as the ublic is involved in the matter, the fmancial cons "aints should not come in the way in giving such trahung.” 1993 not only takes awaigthe valuable right of a 6. Copy of the aforesaid (i Secretary, General Administraiion Department and to the Chief Secretary of the State. rder was forwarded to the [fretted XI~HC-22