RAMCHANDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, Shri Ram Chandra, who is Up -Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Chirai, has challenged the validity of the orders of the State Government dated December 12, 1978, passed in exercise of its powers under Section 17(4) of the Rajasthan Panchayat Act, 1953 (here in after referred to as 'the Act'), whereby the State Government has decided to hold an enquiry into certain charges against the petitioner and has suspended the petitioner from the office of Up -Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Chirai.

(2.) THE petitioner had been elected as Panch of Gram Panchayat, Chirai in the year 1965, and in the year 1969, he was elected as Up -Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat and he continued as Up -Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat till 1977 when the Panchayat was dissolved. In the elections which were held in February, 1978, the petitioner was re -elected as Panch of the said Gram Panchayat and there after he was again elected as Up -Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat. While he was holding the office of Up Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Chirai the impugned orders dated December 12, 1978 were passed by the State Government. By one of those orders, an enquiry into certain charges has been initiated against the petitioner and by the other order, the petitioner has been suspended from the office of Upsarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Chirai. The charges which are the subject matter of the aforesaid enquiry relate to the earlier period prior to the re -election of the petitioner as Panch and Upsarpanch in February, 1978. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders dated December 12, 1978, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(3.) THE writ petition has been contested by the State Government and in the reply to the writ petition filed on behalf of the State Government, it has been denied that the orders regarding the order of the holding of the enquiry for the suspension of the petitioner were passed malafide and it has been asserted that before passing the aforesaid orders a preliminary enquiry was conducted and the order with regard to holding of the enquiry into the charges was passed after taking into consideration the materials on record and evidence collected during the course of the aforesaid preliminary enquiry.