DHARMISHTABEN MUKUNDBHAI PATEL Vs. JAISHRIBEN NITESHBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dtd. 26/4/2011 passed by the Deputy Secretary, Forest & Environment Department, Gandhinagar as well the order dtd. 12/8/2009 passed by the Mamlatdar, Petlad whereby, the Mamlatdar, concluded that the petitioner has failed in performing her duties and directed Taluka Development Officer to move proposal for initiating the proceedings against the petitioner under the provisions of the Gujarat Pachayats Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1993').

(2.) Tersely stated are the facts:-

(3.) Mr Utsav R. Shah, learned advocate for Mr Ashish M. Dagli, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the proceedings under the provisions of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 3 of the Act of 1951 were initiated which, culminated into passing of order dtd. 12/8/2009 whereby, the Mamlatdar, imposed the penalty upon the respondent nos.2 and 3. Mamlatdar had concluded that the petitioner has failed to protect the properties of the panchayat and therefore, has failed to perform her duties under the provisions of the Act of 1993. The Mamlatdar, directed the Taluka Development Officer to initiate the disciplinary proceedings. It is submitted that such direction, could not have been issued more particularly, in the very order, the Mamlatdar, has noted that there is no clear and specific evidence which would prove that the petitioner on her own or through the auction purchaser, got the trees cut. Therefore, when the Mamlatdar has concluded that there is no evidence against the petitioner, the direction contained in the operative portion, could not have been issued.