HEMLAL SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur, dtd. 7/6/2022, the present writ petition has been filed.

(2.) The two petitioners in the instant writ petition are the present and the previous Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Kotgaon, Tehsil Kurud, District Dhamtari. On the ground of certain irregularities and illegalities committed by the petitioners, a show cause notice under Sec. 40 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (in short, the Adhiniyam, 1993) was issued on 12/11/2020 to the petitioner No.1. The petitioner No.1 immediately challenged the same before the District Collector on the ground of the non applicability of the provisions of the Adhiniyam, 1993. According to the petitioners, in the given facts and circumstances if at all if proceedings have to be initiated for the alleged irregularities, it would have to be a proceedings drawn under the provisions of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (in short, the Act of 2005) and not under the Adhiniyam, 1993. The petitioner was able to get an interim protection so far as the operation of the show cause notice. The Collector finally vide order dtd. 22/7/2021 rejected the claim of the petitioner and confirmed the issuance of show cause notice. Thereafter, the petitioner immediately preferred a revision petition before the Commissioner, Raipur Division which too now stands rejected vide order dtd. 7/6/2022 which has led to the filing of the present writ petition.

(3.) The petitioner has been strongly harping on the fact that the notice or the proceedings drawn under the Adhiniyam, 1993 would not be applicable. It would be the Act, 2005 which would be applicable. However, the said core issue has not been discussed or decided either by the District Collector or by the Commissioner through the impugned order and the said issue still is left open.