LEELABEN HARISINH RATHOD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that respondent no. 1 has issued Notification dtd. 30/6/2020 by virtue of which Maghasar Gram Panchayat has been bifurcated into two new Gram Panchayats namely Maghasar Gram Panchayat and Gate Muvala Gram Panchayat and consequently issued Notification on 10/7/2020 for appointing Administrator to take charge of Maghasar Gram Panchayat. According to the petitioner, on 30/10/2018, the Gram Sabha of Maghasar Gram Panchayat purportedly passed a Resolution to bifurcate Maghasar Gram Panchayat into two separate Gram Panchayats as stated above, which was moved with the signature of respondent no. 5 having no authority. It is the case of the petitioner that neither any meeting of Gram Sabha was held on 30/10/2018 nor any Resolution to bifurcate is passed to that effect. This information is received by the petitioner through Right to Information application dtd. 19/8/2018, whereby respondent no. 5 has admitted that on 13/10/2018, no such Resolution came to be passed.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Anuj Dave appearing for the petitioner has raised multiple contentions, but in substance, the main contention is that there is non compliance of Sec. 7(2) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and consultation of the Taluka Panchayat being mandatory, without the same, it is not open to take such kind of decision. It has been submitted that there is a clear defiance of the procedure established by law by virtue of Sec. 7(2) of the Act and as a result of this, the Notification as well as consequential direction deserves to be quashed and set aside.