CWP(T) No.7232/2008 31.08.2010 Present: Mr. Ranjan Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Dy. A.G. for respondents No.1 to 3 Petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Sahayak in terms of appointment letter dated 24.12.1999 (Annexure A-5). His appointment was cancelled in terms of order dated 24.5.2000 (Annexure A-7). 2. There is no dispute that at the time of appointment petitioner was the real nephew of the concerned Up-Pradhan of the Panchayat. The provision of Rule 137 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayat Raj (General) Rules, 1997 specifically bars such selection. At the first instance no appointment could have taken place and on public cry the matter was looked into and appropriate action taken. Hence no fault can be found with the impugned order. 3. It is true that no notice of hearing was issued to the petitioner prior to cancellation of his appointment. Nor were any reports supplied to him. But however in the case of his appointment being ex-facie illegal, at this belated stage, the impugned order cannot be quashed for this reason alone. More so for the reason that the private respondent already stands appointed in his place in the year 2000. 4. The question of validity of the relevant provision of the Rules is left open. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. August 31, 2010 (rana)