LAWS(CHH)-2006-4-30

BASANTI CHANDRA Vs. NAND RAM

Decided On April 13, 2006
Basanti Chandra Appellant
V/S
NAND RAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the interim order made by the Collector, Raigarh, the 5th respondent herein, staying no confidence motion carried out under sub-Section (1) of Section 21 of Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short 'the Adhiniyam') against the 1st respondent and directing notice and fixing the hearing of the Reference (Appeal) on 24-04-2006. the 5th respondent has passed the impugned order in exercise of discretion vested in him. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioners is that in terms of sub-Section (1) of Section 21 of Adhiniyam, since 'no confidence motion' was carried out on 16-03-2006, the first respondent ceased to hold the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat and, therefore, the District Collector ought not to have granted stay. The above submission is not well-founded. It is true that in terms of the sub-Section (1) of Section 21 of Adhiniyam, once 'no confidence motion' is carried out against a Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch, as the case may be, the incumbent of the office shall cease to hold office forthwith, that is to say, with immediate effect. That prescription is not a limitation on the power of the District Collector to pass appropriate interim order when a reference envisaged under sub-Section (4) of Section 21 of the Adhiniyam was made by Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch, as the case may be, for his decision. Even otherwise, such a power should be conceded to the District Collector who has been conferred with the legal power to decide the reference at the behest of the aggrieved Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch against 'no confidence motion' passed against him/her, in order to sub-serve the ends of justice and to avoid failure of justice. Therefore, it cannot be said that the interim order of stay granted by the Collector, Raigarh is one without jurisdiction or legal authority. The impugned order made by the Collector, Raigarh falls within the domain of discretion. I have no good reason to condemn the impugned order as perverse or to hold that it is tainted by vice of arbitrariness and/or irrationality. The writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. Petition Rejected.