HEGH CQURT OF JUDECATURE CHHATTISGARH : EELASPUR SINGLE BENCH Writ §etition Maxi 44S f2§§6 Petitioner Navin Tamion $fo Shri Bhagirathi Tandem, Aged abcu‘; 33 yeas's, President Zita Pamhayat, Dhamtari‘ aistt. Dhamtar§, Rio Wiage Raina Bandha, Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamkari {c.G.) Verws State of Chhattiwarh — Through the Secretary, Panchayat Avam Gramin \Jikash Vibhag, 9K5 Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Bérecton Pan‘chayat Avan Samaj Sewa Directorate, Mahanadé Biock DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG) Ziaa Panchayat, Dhamtari — Through iis Chief Executive Officer, Dhamtari, Di$tL Dhamtari (CG) Janpad Panchayat, Dhamtari — Through ifs Chief Executive Gmcer, Rssgmadems I 1 ‘ Janpe’d Panchayet, Dhemtari, Disit. Dhemiari (CG) Shri Khubiai Kurre, S/o Late Shri Lakru Kurre, Member, Ziia Panchayat, Dhamtari, Rio Village Bangoli, Post Bagod, Biock Kurud, Distt. Dhamtai'i (C.G.) Shri Ajay Chandrakeri the Hon’bie Minister, 9anchayat Avam Gramin Vikash Vibhag, Secretariat DKS Bhawan, Raipur (3.6.) Aahek Kumar Sahu S/o Late Daya Ram Sahu, Rlo Viiiage-Korra, Block- Kurud, Disiriet=Dhamtari (C.G.} Jhui Bai Sahu, W/o Rewa Ram Sehu, Rle Viiiege—Chataud, Poe: Barbe, Biock—Kurud, Disirict— Dhamtari (C.G.) Khiieshwaii Kiran, Wfo Jaiem Singh, Ric Viiiage-Bhanpuri, Disirict— Dhamtari (CG) Guljai' Siegh Markam, S/o Late Maya Ram, R/o Village-Gahansiyai, Dieérict-Dhamtari (6.6.) Bincia Neiam, Wio $adharam. R/e Viilage-Jaipaii, District-Dhamiari (0G; Devendra Chandrakar, S/o Arjun 0) {Q ’iO. 12. u 4 i H§N’LE SHR! SR. NAYAK, CJ. Chandrakar, R19 ViHage—Bushyenga, District—Dhamtari (C.G‘) 13. Premin Sahu, W/o Kuleshwar Sahu, RJo Village-Kandm District-Dhamtari {06.) 14. Kripa Ram Sahu, Sfo Shikam Sahu, R/o ViiiageMagariod, Distfict- Dhamtari (03.) ' Present: $hri P. Diwaker, iearned Sr. Advocate with Shgri Kuna! Das, learned counsel fo‘r the peéitwner. Shri Vinay Harit, ieamed Dy. A.G. for respondents 1 to 4. Shri Vinay Harit, [earned $L Advocate with Smt. Pyeeti Budhia and Shri N.K. Shrivastava, Eeamed ceunsel for responéents 5 and 6. Shi'i Prateek sharma. iearned sounse! for the inEerveners. QRAL ORDER {Passed on 29.$.2005} When this Wm petition was presented, the only substantiai questQon that arose fer decision was whether the notice dated 17.03.2006 of the meeting convened on 24.03.2005 to consider no confidence motion submitted by the respondents 5 & 7 to 14 was in conformity with sub Rule-3 of Ruie 3 of Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Gram Panchayat Ke Sarpanch Tatha Up-Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat Tat‘na Zi!a Panchayat Ke President Tatha Vice-President Ke Virudh Avishwas Ptastav) Niyem, i994 (for short “the Niyam“). When this matter was heard on earlier occasion on 28.04.2006, on behatf of the respondents, it was submitted that de hers the stand taken by the respondents, the respondents wouEd give ciear seven days notice and conddct the meeting to consider the no confidence motion moved against the petitioner. Today, at the time of hearing, it was brought to my notice that aocordingiy, by giving clear seven days notice, no confidence motion submitted by respondents 5 and 7 to i4 was carried out against the petitioner. it was aiso brought to my notice that against the order of this Coed on 28.04.2006, the eetitioner had preterred SLP under Ariicie 136 of the Censtitution and the Apex Court dismissed the same. in View of these deveiopments, the iegai question noticed above has hecome hypothetical. There is no need to decide ihe said iegei question in the pi'eseht proceeding. That question is ieft open to be decided in an appropriate case. Writ petition is dismissed. No costs. i ‘ Sd/- Chief Justice .i i i i, i b/wf’ ‘