IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- SPL. APPL. WRIT No. 152 of 2008 ROOP RAM V/S GRAM PANCHAYAT,JANKIDASWALA Mr. KULDEEP MATHUR, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. NL JOSHI, for the respondent Date of Order : 5.3.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI DEO NARAYAN THANVI,J. ORDER ----- Heard learned counsel for the parties. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is being decided on merits, at this stage itself, as the effected parties are represented. The necessary facts are, that the writ petitioner- respondent filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge, assailing the order of the learned Addl. Collector, Suratgarh, dated 24.5.2007, passed in Case No.89/06, which was a revision filed by the present appellant, seeking to challenge the resolution of the Gram Panchayat dated 25.5.2005, on various grounds. The learned Addl. Collector had allowed the revision, and set aside the resolutions of the Gram Panchayat, being dated 26.1.2003, 5.2.2005 and 25.2.2005, which resolutions related to converting Pukka Khala. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition on the ground that Section 97 of the Panchayati Raj Act does not confer any specific power to cancel, or suspend the resolution passed by Panchayati Raj Institution, as such, order can be passed only by the State Government under section 92. Thus, the order was found to be contrary to law, and was set aside. However, the present appellant was given a liberty to take recourse to the remedy provided under Section 92 for his grievance. Both the learned counsels have made their own submissions to assail and support the impugned order. However, a look at the impugned order shows, that it reproduces the provisions of Section 92 of the Act, and according to sub-section (3) thereof, the Collector has the power, in certain circumstances, to suspend a resolution of any Panchayati Raj Institution, and is to make a report to the State Government, for final decision, with respect to the resolution. In such circumstances, instead of standing to ceremonies, in our view, it would be appropriate to modify the impugned order of the learned Single Judge, so also the order of the learned Addl. Collector, in the manner, that the order of the learned Addl. Collector, being Annex.11 of the writ petition, shall be treated to be an order passed 2 under Section 92(3) only, suspending the resolutions of the Gram Panchayat, and it shall be treated to be a report, to be submitted to the State Government, for final decision, by the State Government. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of, with a direction to the learned Addl. Collector, to forthwith submit the papers, including the order dated 24.5.2007, Annex.11, as a report to the State Government, under Section 92(3), and the State Government is then directed to take a final decision, with respect to the resolutions dated 26.1.2003, 5.2.2005 and 25.2.2005, within a period of six weeks, from the date of receipt of the report. However, tentatively, the parties are directed to appear before the State Government on 25.3.2008, alongwith the copy of this order, so that the concerned authority may mark their attendance, and the learned counsel for the appellant is also directed to produce copy of this order before the learned Addl. Collector forthwith, so as to enable the learned Addl. Collector to do the needful. ( DEO NARAYAN THANVI ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/ 3