PADAM SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Ramgarh which is on the border. He has challenged in this petition the impugned order at Annexure-P14 dated 17. 6. 99 passed by the Collector Jaisalmer by constituting a committee under the Chairmanship of Vikas Adhikari with AEN, Headmaster of Senior Secondary School, Ramgarh, Gram Sevak, Gram Panchayat Ramgarh and Patwari Ramgarh in exercise of his powers u/s. 33 (11) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996 (for short `the Rules') for completing the development work which could not be completed after the election of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Ramgarh and to report about the completion of the work.

(2.) SHRI Udawat Senior Advocate has submitted that by passing the order Annexure-P14 indirectly the petitioner is removed from the post of Sarpanch. He submitted that it is only Sarpanch who must complete the pending development works of the Panchayat, for which no committee required to be constituted. Relying upon the provisions of Section 32 and mainly Sec. 32 (3) SHRI Udawat submitted that it is only in the absence of Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch their office remaining vacant or otherwise, the powers, functions and duties of the Sarpanch shall be exercised by such elected member of the Panchayat and in such a manner as the competent authority may direct. But, for that no committee is required to be constituted. He submitted that in this case the Sarpanch as well as Up-Sarpanch both were very much present, therefore, the impugned order at Annex.-P14 is bad in law and against the provisions of Sec. 32 (2) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act 1994 (for short "the Act" ). He further submitted that work is almost complete, therefore, there is no question of constituting committee.

(3.) AS the main petition is dismissed, the stay petition is also dismissed. .