Skip to content


Ashneel Kumar Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Ashneel Kumar Patel

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt:


.....dated 31.08.2012 passed in writ appeal no.947/2012. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that while considering the matter, this fact was not brought into the notice of this court that the sister-in-law of the applicant had submitted her resignation on 24.7.2007, which was accepted on 1.8.2007 and thereafter the matter of the applicant was considered by the gram panchayat on 6.9.2007 and on 7.9.2007, the applicant was appointed. all these facts could not be produced before this court at the time of hearing on 31.8.2012 in writ appeal no.947/2012. it is also submitted by shri pareek that at the relevant time the criteria for appointment of panchayat karmi was not on the basis of majority, but on the basis of merit, as has been held by division bench of this court in suresh v. chief executive officer, zila panchayat barwani and others-2011 (4) mplj 717 it is submitted that all these facts could not be brought into the notice of this court when the writ appeal was heard at admission stage and was dismissed. we have gone through the order dated 31.8.2012 passed in writ appeal no.947/2012 and found that all the aforesaid facts could not be considered while hearing.....

Judgment:


Review Petition No.809/2012 13/03/2013 Shri Paresh Pareek, counsel for the applicant.

Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy.

Government Advocate, for the Respondents/State.

This application has been filed seeking review of the order dated 31.08.2012 passed in Writ Appeal No.947/2012.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that while considering the matter, this fact was not brought into the notice of this Court that the sister-in-law of the applicant had submitted her resignation on 24.7.2007, which was accepted on 1.8.2007 and thereafter the matter of the applicant was considered by the Gram Panchayat on 6.9.2007 and on 7.9.2007, the applicant was appointed.

All these facts could not be produced before this Court at the time of hearing on 31.8.2012 in Writ Appeal No.947/2012.

It is also submitted by Shri Pareek that at the relevant time the criteria for appointment of Panchayat Karmi was not on the basis of majority, but on the basis of merit, as has been held by Division Bench of this Court in Suresh v.

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Barwani and others-2011 (4) MPLJ 717

It is submitted that all these facts could not be brought into the notice of this Court when the writ appeal was heard at admission stage and was dismissed.

We have gone through the order dated 31.8.2012 passed in Writ Appeal No.947/2012 and found that all the aforesaid facts could not be considered while hearing the writ appeal on admission.

In view of the aforesaid, we find that the matter deserves to be heard on merit and accordingly, the order dated 31.8.2012 passed in Writ Appeal No.947/2012 is recalled.

The matter be placed for hearing on admission before the Appropriate Bench.

This review petition is accordingly allowed with no order as to costs.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.

Vimla Jain) Judge Judge shukla


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //