SURENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. ZILA COLLECTOR, DHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India is to an appellate order dated 29.9.2001. (Annexure P 3) passed by Collector under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. By the impugned order, the Collector has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner, thereby affirming the no confidence motion taken out against the petitioner by 2 3rd majority.

(2.) PETITIONER is an elected Sarpanch of Village Panchkeda. He was served with a no confidence motion and on 2.6.2001, he was removed because out of total 21 members, 16 members voted in favor of no confidence, i.e., against the petitioner, supporting this ouster. It was thus canned through by 2/3rd majority. This was then challenged by the petitioner in appeal before the Collector who, by impugned order dismissed the appeal and upheld the no confidence motion. In the opinion of Collector, it was validly carried out by 2/3rd majority and hence petitioner was rightly removed from the post of Sarpanch.

(3.) IN my opinion, the submissions have no force to stand. The Collector, as an appellate authority, was justified in dismissing the appeal and upholding the no confidence move holding that it was rightly carried out by 2/3rd majority of the elected members. The fact that members were present at the move of voting and signing is not in dispute. What was later on disputed by the petitioner was that some members did not put their signatures voluntarily. This was not accepted by the Collector.