(1.) This appeal has been filed under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchch Nyayalay (Khandnyaypeeth ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 arising out of the judgment and order passed in WP No. 15595/2007 dated 27.06.2012, [reported in 2012(3) M.P.L.J 627, Narendra Kumar v. State of M.P. by which the learned writ Court remanded the matter back to Gram Panchayat with a specific direction to re-screen the applications submitted by the candidates pursuant to the selection procedure initiated for appointment on the post of "Panchayat Karmi" and prepare a merit list strictly in order of the merit on the basis of marks obtained in the qualifying examination and to convene a meeting for selection of Panchayat Karmi.
(2.) It is also directed by the learned Writ Court that the case of appellant and respondent no. 4 both be considered in the said meeting, proper selection of Panchayat Karmi be done and a resolution be passed in this respect and the order of appointment be issued in respect of the selected candidate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Kundam and CEO, Janpad Panchayat concerned were to supervise the selection and appointment of Panchayat Karmi to Gram Panchayat Padhariya Tehsil Kundam, District Jabalpur.
(3.) Contention of the appellant is that certain applications were invited for appointment of Panchayat Karmi by the Gram Panchayat Padhariya along with requisite documents and experience certificate. The Gram Panchayat passed resolution and decided to grant appointment to the appellant on the post of Panchayat Karmi. In compliance of the said resolution, appointment order was issued in favour of the appellant on 31.08.2007. Respondent 4 made complaint before the SDO against the said resolution. The SDO instead of granting an opportunity of hearing, passed the impugned order and directed that the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat be suspended and also directed the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat to issue an order of appointment in respect of respondent no. 4. The matter was not referred to the Collector, Jabalpur for approval of the order of suspension as provided under Section 85(2) of the Act.