SHANKAR SHAIYYAM Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the Up -Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Kendatola. Respondent No. 4 was elected as Sarpanch of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat. A motion of no -confidence was moved against him on 30th September, 2000 on certain charges of corruption. The photostat copy of the proceeding has been brought on record as Annexure P -1. After he was removed from the post of Sarpanch the petitioner was given the charge of Sarpanch. It is alleged that the respondent No. 4 had given an undertaking that she would deposit rupees 18,523/ - by 13th October, 2000 but she failed to deposit the same. It is pleaded that inspite of allegations against her the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 Sub -Divisional Officer, Revenue (Assistant Election Officer) and Naib Tehsildar, Baihar (Returning Officer) have permitted the respondent No. 4 to contest in the bye -election to be held on 17 -12 -2000 in violation of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 and the Rules framed thereunder. It is also urged that the respondent No. 4 is not entitled in law to contest in the bye -election.

(2.) NOTICE was issued to the respondent No. 4 but she has chosen not to appear. However, as a pure question of law arises Mr. Sunil Choubey, learned Panel Lawyer for the State appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 agreed to argue the matter.

(3.) THE core question that falls for consideration is when a Sarpanch is removed from his/her post by vote of no -confidence, is he/she entitled to contest in the bye -election.