BALDEVBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL Vs. MUKESHBHAI AATMARAM PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri Percy Kavina, learned seniour counsel, assisted by Ms. Neha Kayastha, learned counsel for the appellant, and Shri Vikas Nair and Mr. Nimesh Patel, learned counsels appearing for the respondents.

(2.) This is an intra Court appeal (Letters Patent Appeal) assailing the correctness of the judgment of learned Single Judge, whereby learned Single Judge allowed the petition filed by the Sarpanch (respondent No.1 herein) and quashed the orders passed against the Sarpanch removing him under the provisions of Section 57(1) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993. The present appellant happened to be the complainant, on whose complaint, the proceedings have been initiated and the orders for removal were passed. Learned Single Judge having examined the same and having held that the orders were bad in law, quashed the same.

(3.) In our opinion, the present appellant, who is only the complainant, would not have right to maintain this appeal as his role was confined for lodging the complaint before the complainant authority in appropriate manner and to assist or provide evidence before the competent authority in support of his complaint. Beyond that, the complainant would not have any role to challenge an order passed not accepting the complaint.