ANIL KUMAR AHIREY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 14-11-2002 (Annexure P-l) passed by the Additional Collector, Bilaspur and the order dated 10-12-2002 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Nagopahari, pursuant to the order dated 14-11-2002.

(2.) The facts, in nutshell, for disposal of the case, are that the petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Karmi on 24-11-1995. All of a sudden by order dated 14-11-2002 (Annexure P-l), on the basis of some complaints made by the villagers, the Additional Collector, Bilaspur, directed the Gram Panchayat, Nagopahari to remove the petitioner from the post of Panchayat Karmi. On the basis of the said order, the Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Nagopahari, passed the impugned removal order dated 10-12-2002 (Annexure P-2). Thus, this petition.

(3.) Shri Shastri, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that since the mandatory, statutory provisions of Rule 7 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999, (for short "the Rules, 1999") were not followed before removing the petitioner from the post of Panchayat Karmi, the impugned removal order was illegal and bad on the ground that the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of hearing. To buttress his submission, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner cited the decisions of this Court rendered in Raj Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others, W.P. No. 1850 of 2001, decided on 15-11-2006, Dhaluram Kosaria Vs. State of C.G. and others, 2006 2 CgLJ 186, which was relied on in Anjordas Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others, 2008 3 MPJR 110.