SHANTABEN BACHUBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 25/26. 08. 2008 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the appellant's petition challenging the order of removal from the office of Sarpanch of Bopal Gram Panchayat by the District Development Officer, Ahmedabad and confirmed by the Additional Development Commissioner.

(2.) THE appellant was elected as the Sarpanch of Bopal Gram Panchayat at the election held on 25. 12. 2006. In the meantime, writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 1128 of 2005 was filed before this Court complaining about water logging and unclean conditions in the Panchayat area. This Court had passed an interim order on 15th February, 2006 and in compliance, the Revenue Department had issued directives on 1st May, 2006 that till further instructions, no permission for conversion of land for non-agricultural use should be granted by the Panchayat. Inspite of such directives, several constructions were going on unabated and no steps were taken for halting such construction activities. The appellant had granted permission to construct building on plot Nos. 5, 6 and 7 in survey No. 636 on 8th March, 2007 and similarly permission was granted to put up construction on plot Nos. 33, 34 and 35 in survey No. 262 on 16th April, 2007. There were many such instances and in the above cases the appellant had granted building permission even without the Gram Panchayat granting such permission. Even after the appellant resumed the office in January-2007, the Gram Panchayat was informed by communication dated 16th March, 2007 of the higher authorities that unauthorized construction be stopped and necessary report be made to the Taluka Development Officer. Far from complying with such direction, the appellant went on giving building permissions even in April and May-2007.

(3.) IN view of the above, the appellant was served with the notice to show cause as to why the appellant should not be removed from the office of Sarpanch under Section 57 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, (hereinafter referred to as"the Act" ). The appellant submitted her reply contending that the instructions of the Revenue Department were received before the appellant took over the charge as Sarpanch on 17th January, 2007; and that the responsibility to carry out the instructions was that of the Talati-cum-Mantri and the Talati-cum-Mantri had not brought such instructions to the notice of the appellant. The District Development Officer did not accept the said explanation and passed the impugned order dated 21. 08. 2007 holding that the appellant has committed misconduct in discharge of her duties and a number of development permissions i. e. building permissions were granted after this Court had prohibited the same and the Revenue Department had issued instructions. Such permissions were granted even after the prohibitory instructions were conveyed to the Panchayat on 16. 03. 2007 and in as many as 8 cases without the Resolution of the Gram Panchayat, the appellant had granted such permission and thereby committed grave misconduct. The District Development Officer also noticed that in a large number of cases of unauthorized construction, no notices were issued against the erring land owners. The District Development Officer also rejected the contention that it was the duty of the Talati-cum-Mantri to control such illegal activity.