RANI BAI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner is challenging the order dated 18-1-2002 passed by respondent No. 2 whereby it has been directed to stay the order passed against respondent Nos. 4 and 5 from the post of Sarpanch, Lalpur Gram Panchayat till decisions of appeal preferred by respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Briefly stated facts are that respondent No. 4 was an elected Sarpanch, Lalpur and on a complaint made by the present petitioner who is Up-Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat and others, respondent No. 3, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Lormi, Distt. Bilaspur started an enquiry against respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and in exercise of its powers vested under Section 40 of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 removed respondent Nos. 4 and 5 by passing an ex parte order dated 28-12-2001 (Annexure P-1). Against this order, respondent No. 4 preferred appeal and the Collector while admitting the appeal has rejected the application for staying the impugned order vide his order dated 2-1-2002 (Annexure P-2). Being aggrieved by the order dated 2-1-2002 passed by the Collector (Annexure P-2), respondent Nos. 4 and 5 filed revision and the Commissioner/respondent No. 2 by ex parte order dated 18-1-2002 (Annexure P-4) set aside the order passed by the Collector and stayed the effect and operation of the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority (Annexure P- 2) and that of the Sub-Divisional Officer (Annexure P-1). The present petitioner has filed this petition against the order dated 18-1-2002 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Commissioner claiming the following reliefs:--

(2.) This Court vide order dated 30-1-2001 directed issuance of notice and granted interim stay on 6-2-2002. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have filed reply thereto. Application (I.A. No. 84/2002) for vacating interim stay has been filed. Hearing on I.A. No. 84/2002 as well as the petition will take time; therefore, with the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard finally on different dates. The matter regarding removal of Sarpanch/member or any office bearer of the Gram Panch is provided in Section 40 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993. The same is relevant here and quoted below:--

(3.) On complaint made by the petitioner, enquiry was made by C.E.O., Janpad Panchayat, Lormi. On the basis of this report, show-cause notices were issued to the respondent Nos. 4 and 5. It is not disputed that in the show-cause notice, which is said to be received by respondents on 26-12-2001, the date of appearance was given to them as 28-12-2001. According to the order Annexure P-1 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, respondent Nos. 3 and 4 did not appear on 28-12-2001 and that day itself the Sub-Divisional Officer, herein respondent No. 3, proceeded ex parte and passed the order (Annexure P-1). Consequent to the said order, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 not only stand removed from their office, but they shall also stand disqualified for a period of six years as contemplated under Sub-section (2) of Section 40 of the Act, 1993. In this connection, it is apt to reproduce the relevant Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order (Annexure P-1) passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, respondent No. 3 herein, which reads as under :-- .......[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]......