PRAVEEN KUMARI Vs. ANIL KUMAR & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed under Section 2(1) of M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam,2005 against order dated 20.7.2011 in W.P. No.5211 of 2010 by which a writ petition preferred by the respondent No.1 was allowed and the impugned order Annexure P-6 passed by the Collector, setting aside a resolution of the Gram Panchayat was quashed, holding that it was without jurisdiction. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that so far as the merits of the case is concerned, he is not pressing this appeal but is confining his arguments in respect of the closure of right of the appellant to file an appeal against the order of appointment issued in this matter. It is further submitted that so far as the resolution of the Gram Panchayat is concerned, no revision lies before the Collector, as has been held by the full Bench of this Court in Devi Dayal Raikwar vs. State of M.P., 2008 3 MPHT 505, but against the appointment order, an appeal can be filed before the concerned Sub Divisional officer. Though in the earlier round of litigation a liberty was given to the appellant to file an appeal but the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 has closed the right of appeal to the appellant. It is submitted that the aforesaid appeal could not be filed because the resolution of the Gram Panchayat by which the respondent No.1 was appointed, itself was set aside by the Collector, so there was no occasion to the appellant to file an appeal against the appointment order of the respondent No.1.

(2.) Now as per the order passed by the Single Bench the order of the Collector has been set aside so the cause of action arises to the appellant to file an appeal against the appointment order of respondent No.1. It is further submitted by Shri Gaharwar that if the aforesaid right is not made available to the appellant, the appellant shall be without any remedy and such permission be granted to the appellant to file an appeal in accordance with law.

(3.) Though the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 opposed the aforesaid contention but considering the fact that after setting aside the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat by the Collector, there was no occasion to the appellant to file an appeal against the appointment order of the respondent No.1 and only after setting aside the order passed by the Collector, the cause of action arises to the appellant and if such right is closed, the appellant may suffer irreparably. In these circumstances, without interfering the order on merits, we find it appropriate to allow an opportunity to the appellant to file appeal against the appointment order of respondent No.1 within 30 days from today. The appellate authority shall consider the aforesaid appeal in accordance with law excluding the question of limitation. With the aforesaid liberty, this appeal is finally disposed of with no order as to cost.