RADHE SHYAM SINGH RAJPUT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) It has been argued that the impugned order is palpably illegal and is contrary to the statutory scheme provided under Sections 39 & 40 of the Adhiniyam, 1993 inasmuch as an office bearer of a panchayat is suspended on occurrence of contingencies as provided under clauses (a) (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 39, when the criminal charge as mentioned therein or proceeding for his removal from his office is initiatedand, therefore, before his suspension he should be issued a show cause notice along with a charge sheet under Section 40 of the Adhiniyam, 1993.

(3.) In the case in hand, the petitioner has not been suspended on account of registration of a criminal case against him for charges mentioned in Section 39 (1) (a) of the Adhiniyam, 1993, but he has been suspended on the allegation of certain misconduct, which may ultimately constitute the foundation for initiating proceeding under Section 40 of the Adhiniyam, 1993.