: iSi l ?5 !i S?a®Rur;s S. 7S s.i;{ 5i5 :S ^ Writ Petition (Q No. 5013 of 2007 . Bhagwat Kumar Son of Shri Aoirit Pi^sad, aged about 32years, Caste Lohar, Resident of Village Targawan, Post Kasara, Talisil Baikunfhpur, District Koriya (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarfl, Ttirough: The Secretaiy, Departinent of Paucbayat and Social Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The CoUector, Konya, District Koriya (C.G.) The Sub Divisional Ofiicer, iaikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) The Chief Executive Ofiicer, Janpad Panchayat Baikus.thpur, District Koriya (C.G.) Gram Paachayat Targawaii, TIu-ough.: The Sarpanch, Janpad Paachayat Baikunthpur, District Surguja (C.G.) Ritesh Kum.ar Shanna, Son of Shri Raineshwar Shanaa, aged about 33 years, Caste Brahinin (Selected Panchayat Kanni), Resident of Vulage Targawaa, Post Kasara, Tafasil Baikunthpur, District Koriya (C.G.) r.-i^rf^lS- ?¥1Sii^'S£*^> d •i£?JTi?r^'?^. O^^ y!k'St Tt1S.2' Shri A.K. Shukla, coxuisel for tbe petitioner. Shri Satish. Gupta, Dy. Govt. Advocate for fhe State/i^spondents.No.1,2 & 3 on adva&ce copy. Shri Mahendra Dubey, counsel for respondent No.6. He states that he has filed a Caveat Petitiou, but fhe satae has not been aniiexed wifh tliis petition. • f r /• '\'^,. W.P.f'C)No.5013of Sh^-na The petitioner, who was a candidate for appointaient to the post of Paiichayat Kai-mi, has challenged fhe legality of fiie resolution dated 21/6/2007 (Annexure P/2), by wliich, after coasideruig fhe names of 8 caadidates, naine of respondent No.6 has been recommended by the Gram Sabha. Leamed counsel for fhe petitidner subiaits fhat according to the prevafliug rules, quoruni etc. were not coinplete and fhe resoliition has not been passed iu accordaiice with fhe rules. Needless to say fhat fhe inatter of appointinent of Paachayat Karmi ia fhe concemed Grain Paiichayat has not attamed fiiiality at fllis stage, fhe saiue is under process and fhe petition has been filed ouly after passing of the resolution by tlie Gram Sabha, as both the parties aduut fhat till date, no appoiutoient .orders have been issued iu tavoui' of any caadidate. In fhis view ofUie laatter, I am notincltned to entertaill fhis writ petition at. fhis uiter-niediate stage, as fhe process of appoiatmer.it is still goitig on. , However, I deeni it proper to dispose of tttis petition witli a direction to fhe petitioner to biiag all these facts to the knowledge of tlie coiicemed CoUector, who wiU. examitie tlie niatter regardiilj quoruin etc. in accordaace wi'Oa the prevaituig rules appUcable for resolution of a Grain Sabha. Witli the afbresaid obsei-vation, this petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost. ——-—^—- Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge