SHEELA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 16783 of 2007 and 6788 of 2008 as common question of law is involved. However, facts are culled out separately. Facts of C.W.P. No. 16783/2007. Petitioner-Smt. Sheela Devi was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Village Mandhothi, Block Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar in March 2005. F.I.R. No. 39 and 24.2.2006 under Sections 302/506/120-B/148/149 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, PS City Bahadurgarh was registered against the petitioner and others. She was granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 22.2.2007 (Annexure P/1) after remaining in custody for one year. During her detention, a show cause notice dated 23.3.2006 was issued to her through Jail Superintendent, Rohtak, seeking to suspend her from the office of Sarpanch. She filed no reply to that show cause notice. Deputy Commissioner, Jhajjar, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 51(1)(a) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (for short Rs.1994 Act') passed impugned order dated 21.8.2006 (Annexure P/2) suspending the petitioner from the office of Sarpanch on account of registration of aforesaid F.I.R., the contents of which, against the petitioner, in the opinion of the competent authority came within the definition of moral turpitude.

(2.) PETITIONER challenged her suspension by filing an appeal before respondent No. 1, after a lapse of more than 13 months (seven months after her release on bail), whereas it was to be filed within 30 days, as required under Section 51(5) of the 1994 Act. The appeal was dismissed by respondent No, 1, vide order dated 9.10.2007 (Annexure P/3) holding that charge levelled against Sint. Sheela Devi, Sarpanch was of serious nature and involved moral turpitude, which was likely to cause embarrassment in discharge of her duties as Sarpanch. Hence the present writ petition challenging the order dated 9.10.2007 (Annexure P/3) and 21.8.2006 (Annexure P/2). Facts of C. W.P. No. 6788/2008. Petitioner-Hoshiar Singh was elected as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Village Dherdu, Tehsil and District Kaithal in March 2005. Baljit Singh (respondent No. 3), Panch of the same Village filed a complaint against petitioner-Hoshiar Singh before the Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal (respondent No. 2) alleging that F.I.R. No. 39 dated 27.2.2006 under Sections 420/406 IPC, PS Dhand was registered against the petitioner, wherein it was alleged that Hoshiar Singh- Sarpanch had taken Rs. 4 lacs on account of sending one Sunil Kumar to Holland/England. On receipt of said complaint, Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal issued a show cause notice dated 28.3.2006, under Section 51(1) of the 1994 Act, for suspending the petitioner from the office of Sarpanch. Petitioner submitted his reply dated 3.4.2006 and was also given opportunity of personal hearing on four different dates. It was submitted by the petitioner that the allegations in the F.I.R. were false and that regular bail had been granted to him. After consideration of the reply, Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal in exercise of powers under Section 51(1) of the 1994 Act, suspended the petitioner from the office of Sarpanch vide order dated 24.8.2006 (Annexure P/1), after forming an opinion that the petitioner was alleged to have committed an offence involving immoral turpitude due to which he cannot perform his duties properly. Aggrieved against his suspension, petitioner filed an appeal before respondent No. 1. Vide order dated 31.10.2006 (Annexure P/2), respondent No. 1 allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 24.8.2006 (Annexure P/1). Baljit Singh (respondent No. 3) approached this Court by way of C.W.P. No. 11490 of 2007, challenging the acceptance of appeal by respondent No. 1 and sought setting aside of order dated 31.10.2006 (Annexure P/2). The said writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 27.8.2008 (Annexure P/3) and the impugned order dated 31.10.2006 (Annexure P/2) was set aside on the ground that since charges in the aforesaid F.I.R., against Hoshiar Singh, Sarpanch have been framed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 16.1.2007, therefore, it was a fit case for the appellate authority to re-hear the appeal in the light of the changed circumstances. Accordingly, a fresh order dated 23.4.2008 (Annexure P/4) was passed by the appellant authority (respondent No. 1), dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner and upholding the order dated 24.8.2006 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kaithal. Hence the present writ petition challenging the order dated 24.8.2006 (Annexure P/1) and 23.4.2008 (Annexure P/4).

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has argued that since C.W.P. No. 13355 of 2002 Sahib Singh v. State of Haryana and others, 2003(2) RCR(Civil) 398 (P&H) involving the identical question as to whether merely on finding of name of Sarpanch/Panch in any FIR in itself implies defect of character likely to embarrass him/her in the discharge of his duties, stands admitted for consideration before a Full Bench, therefore, the present writ petitions may be kept pending to await the outcome of the said writ petition.