GAJADHAR SINGH BAGHEL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 26/11/2019 (Annexure P1) passed by Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior by which the order dated 17/09/2019 has been stayed.

(2.) The necessary facts for disposal of the present petition in short are that the petitioner claims himself to be the In-charge Sarpanch and on 18/06/2019 the competent authority-cum-CEO, Zila Panchayat, Datia had issued a notice (Annexure P/4) to the respondent No.4 to show cause as to why action be not taken against him under Sections 40 & 92 of MP Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993. Earlier, a similar notice was issued on 15/05/2019. By order dated 17/09/2019 (Annexure P5), the competent authority-cum- CEO, Zila Panchayat Datia in Case No.348/Zila Panchayat/Section 40/18-19/3917 removed the respondent No.4 from the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Khamroli, Janpad Panchayat Sevdha, District Datia and also directed for initiating further proceedings under the provisions of MP Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 and accordingly, it was also directed that an amount of Rs.6.71 lacs be also recovered from the Sarpanch/ Secretary.

(3.) Being aggrieved by order dated 17/09/2019 (Annexure P5), the respondent No.4 filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Gwalior Division,Gwalior which was registered as Case No.295/Appeal/2019-20. By order dated 18/11/2019, the Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior directed the respondent No.4 to deposit half of the outstanding amount before consideration of his application for stay and accordingly, the matter was fixed for 02/12/2019. However, it appears that the respondent No.4 filed an application for urgent hearing and on 19/11/2019, the matter was again taken up by the Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior and the respondent No.4 also produced the receipt of deposit of Rs.1,68,000/- which was half of the amount of Rs.3.35 lacs, as according to the respondent No.4, 50% of outstanding amount of Rs.6.71 lac was to be recovered from the Secretary. Accordingly, by order dated 19/11/2019, the Commissioner, Gwalior Division stayed the recovery of remaining amount and again fixed the case for 02/12/2019. It appears that once again, an application for stay was filed by the respondent No.4 and on 26/11/2019, by ignoring the previous orders, the Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior stayed the operation of order dated 17/09/2019 and again, fixed the case for 02/12/2019. It is submitted that once the respondent No.4 was removed from his office, then by granting interim relief, the Court cannot grant final relief. It is submitted that once the Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior had fixed the case for 02/12/2019, then he should not have passed a fresh order on 19/11/2019 and 26/11/2019. Furthermore, it is submitted that once, the Commissioner, Gwalior Division, Gwalior had not granted the stay of effect and operation of order dated 17/09/2019, then there was no occasion for him to review its own order and to pass a fresh order on 26/11/2019.