^, , ,A;W '• te..; <,.: IN THE HIGH GOURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WRIT PETITION N0. 2^A8 9 /2003 PEtlTIONEiR ^ y^f ^i^ .M^:"""7 : -'^'^^^i''' <<i^?'T^'-:)::'':' ':^<^'''':.:':-..^^1::^ 1. Hard^vlal Rathia S/o Sanatram fed about 40 years, Sarpanch, Grain Panchayat, Munund, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh (€.G.)^ VERSUS PurusKottam S/o Rara Baiga Rathia Up-saTpanGh, Gram Panchayat Munund, Tah.. Dharamjaigarh, ' Distt:. Raigarh (C.G.) ; 2.- Anupain Tiwari, Naib TahsUdar, Dharajnftjaigarh, . Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) i 3. Chief Executive Of&cer, Janapad PancKayat Dharamjaigarh, DistERaigarh (C.G.) State of Chliattisgarh, 4. Thiough Collector, R^irh (C.G;! WRrTPETmONUND@lARTlGLES226AN THE CONSTn'UTION OF INDIA PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS : As perfhe cause tifle. ^ ^ PARnCULARSOFTHBRESPONDENTS: Asper fhe cause tifLe. ; < 27 OF 'yw XI-HC-22 :-1- ^c?'•:qpn?ra; »dl^<i<»,R«ai*<>i< 3n^?T tra^,_^,^ po. s-l^17/^ •^ 200 MWWl Wllcti sii^qn h-i\d»3V^V w^w ^^. 118/0872003 SII^I TOiRIT ^lfeT SIiriK.N.Naade,counsel Shri Praveen Das, P.L. fofc and 4 By this petition unde; Constitution of India, fhe petiti dated 31/12/2002 passed b Panchayat Appeal No.39/A-8 dismlssed tiie appeal of t&e p confldence laotion dated 29/07^2002 was rcniovcd fimn thc ppst of Muiiuiid. I have heard Mr. Naade leAined .aad Mf. P. Das, counsel for the Learaed couaisel for fhe offhe resolutioii (Aanexure A/2) resolution ie., 29/07/2002 tfa^ .Sarpaachs aad othfir Paachas,] whercas pcrusal of Miautcs of| '(ilils'idl-) iiiCT'iift'A <(ai<sii ^3iSgi(ai^[ :or the petitioner. tfae State/respondents no. 3 Section 226/227 of fhe joner ]saa chaUeitged fhe order '^ the Collector, Ra^arh in 8^/2002-2003. The CoUector stitioner filed ^atust the no- by wfiich the pctitioner .Sarpaach, Ctearii Pancltaayat, couasel for the petitioner ijespondents no.3 and 4. pejtitioner si.ibaiitBi'lihiat a penlsal Ireveals fhaton fhje;date offhe preseace of Sarpanchs, Up- ia att 20, has been shown Meetmg shows that only 16 [•^^a^ !; 1 XI-HC-22 3II^['^I h'tt'h Sf^; sft<fl<^ «f?a '3^? ^IFIRPT, Sfllu'ie, (»l<attl'f< 3Tr^?T tRR? <iri-[dTti)iira» •M SII^TWITW^lfel ineinbers of Panchayat pardc^pated in fhe no-confidence inotion aad that is hiow tbe fouit casting of their votes. He 17/0712002 ten Paaclias madj; affidavit ttiat they had not signe4 confidence motion aad their sitaiatuTes blaiik paper. The leamed S.D.O| enquiry lato the aUegations ofthe| Paachas. In vlew of the above, learfred submitted that as tfae four nieml thc Mccting of No-coafidcncc M^ 7 ' - • • was not fair, rcasonablc aad fhc the CoUector as weU as the resot liable to be set aside. A perusal offhe order of 31/12/ 2002 reveals fhat bofhj rejected by fhe learaed CoUectoit iia.2 it has been shown that all ^O Mexabers were present, but if we look into fhe cblumn wi{h respect to Miautes of fhe cnt<<I?i<i1i *iiH<fff.'? Fs^ <^i^t< ^T 3lf:tlll 3tI^T Panchas were depriwed &oin further subnutted that on a representation with the the papers for inoviag ofno- were obtained on a should Iiave conducted the counsel for tfae petitioner )ers had not partfcipated ia ition. Thcicfore, fhc Mccting disputed.as such fhc ordcr of hition dated 29/07t/2002 are the Collector, Raigarh dated fhe coatentions have been It is true that ia column. [Tfr^ ^Rsi^ T XI-HC-22 aii^r'qii Rt'li* 31)^1 ^^i^iflf^fl: "S^ -Ml^ld^, yilly'is, f'ifliu'i' 3TI^?T IRT^ ^wwi sniich SD^I TOIIWdft^ specipcaBy Meeting it has been Paacbas iacluding the petiticjni Tbe pmvisions of Section 2 1 Swaraj Adhiniyam 1993 ( for a motion ofno-confidence by a resolution passed by inaj of the Pancttas present and than two thud of the total Accpitiuig Gram Panchayat, for tfae ti^ Sarpaach agamst.whom suc4 hold officc forfhwith. nicniba-s of fhc Paachayatj pifesent that the quoreun was niunber of Paaehas ep] nulmber tube confidence Motion agaulst fh^ present aad put pf 16, 'SRI^'ift'l TWRif'? f^st <^l-t^[< ^?3lf:OT3II^t inentioned fhat only 16 4aer were present ui fhe nieeting. 4fC.G. Paachayat Raj Avam Grani ^hort, the Act) lays down fhat dn t(ig passed byfhe Gram Panehayat jorily ofnotless than three fourth ^oting aad such iaajori.ly is inore of Paachas constituting the being, tfae Sarpaactt or Up- motion is passed, shall cease tp to-thus provision, whcn 16 includio^ thc pctitioncr WCTO niore than.two-fhinl of fhe total epnstitutfng fhe Gratn Pancahayat; on the date and also jst ;fiilfils fhe j|>thfir FEagun-ements fhat xiot less thaa three-fourfh of fhe P^nchas present passed. fhe No- petitiQnier i.e., 16 meinbers vpere 1|5 Memhers voted. against fhe ^~- [•q^^g^ XI-HC-22 'ysi 'itWlvi^, a'gl^'is, fqcii'y^ 3ff^?r 'ira^ WW!Ta»*<|ch •^ 200 sn^iqn R-li.'* OT^I s>"<il> fS^: sii^i ^arw ^iftff <i>^I<*i*<l'F( 'RTO^if ^^^ <f^i^« ^T SI^tPT SD^T petitioner. Therefore, the resolu^ion was passed in consonaace ofthe provisions oftheAct. Now coming to the ques|tion Paachas gave in writing with apdavit had not s^ned the papers regar|iiug Motion. Ttie proceedings dat^d conducted, in the presence a(id Anupam Tiwari, Nalb Tahsildar,| 16 meinbers of tlie Pancfaayaf; petitioner. If the ten Pancttas 17/07/20,02, thca fhcy wcro at / ' ! • . niccting itsclf that thcy havc nc^l for the no-coafidence inotion. opporhJLaily proceeduigs reveals that to speak whatever fhey waat to the m.0tion or .^[ainst fbe inotio^ to the petitioner, but he had no1| any streteh of imaguiatkin i( memorandum dated 17/07/200[ that on 17/07/2002 ten pdavit to the S.D.O. that they moving the No-confidence W 107 {'2002, which were tmder the supervision of Dharamja^arh, Dist. Raigarh ; were presen.t iacludmg the moved an. appUGation on fibcrty to raisc objcction in thc |t laovcd any such appUcation pn the contraiy, perusal of the jtnily was given to the Paachas tpeak i.e., whefher m fiavoTtr of L. Opportunily was also giveii said aa5rthing. Therefore, by caxtnot be SaM ttiat the It |2 was not taken care ofat the \ ? _^^-:. J3SS ^ww] aSpnp TOPt?ifa-3-7 -/PS si I.T pire passmisip sq 0^3 liiAi.aqt m: aonetsqns AUB pug suoissttaqns aip. ui aouKtsqns aouspgnoo-on aip jo jnoAB}: pne aopoafqo AUB paste.l l.oa l[[ ^lliod 3Tp. 3SIB.I cq. l.q8u 3Ty. T[B qons paAoia SBqouec); uai Iftyto hiyK. Ib >!?»!»]>pi&l jt jUhlh 1-lbUjbltfc •passimsip [CfBff si ames aq^ pue uot^ad ou op i 'aAoqe aipjo MaiAiii pue oa aiojaiatp: sl aiaqj, -aoiioui UT paioA Aaip Aie.qnoo 3Tp uo peq Aaip ^nq 'Jias^T Supaaia aip EppIA 3J3AI &3Ty. U3Tp UOE)BOT[ddB aip p^H 'sSiiipaaooild jo aiaa T^PW D2j»>felD»a teyK. wz ~l'rt,............-.--.-.--.....-.......-..tf;>!htB IMhlk tte^K I^IM? >T;n.ii->y 'airftp®'bl'>'blb'1££- :K; ^^^..^S'y'iFS^vy^ -r"^'; A) i ^' i ^ ^ i^f^ iiy> A.:^'} Ba)» tfclkiB lisgte tb'll-bj llb Ityif ZZ-3H-K