Full Judgment
Writ Petition No.19700/2012 20.2.2013 Shri Deepak Pendharkar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Government Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 4. Shri Arvind Shrivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.5.
1. Respondent no.5 is a Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Amirati, District Satna. He is facing the process of recalling under section 21-A of the Madhya Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (in short “the Act”.) before respondent no.4 Sub-Divisional Officer. Respondent no.4 by his order dated 3.11.2012 fixed the process for voting on 18.11.2012. Aggrieved, respondent no.5 filed a revision before respondent no.2 Divisional Commissioner (Revenue) under Rule 5 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayats (Appeal and Revision) Rules 1995 (in short “the Rules”.) Respondent no.2 by the impugned order dated 7.11.2012 has stayed the process before respondent no.4. It is in this background the petitioner has rushed to this Court by submitting that since the order dated 3.11.2012 of respondent no.4 is appealable both under sub-section (4) of section 21-A of the Act and Rule 3 of the Rules, respondent no.2 has no jurisdiction to entertain the revision and stay the process of recalling.
2. The relevant sub-section 4 of section 21-A of the Act reads as under : “(4) If such Sarpanch or Panch, as the case may be, desires to challenge the validity of recalling him under the foregoing sub-sections he shall within seven days from the date on which he is deemed to have vacated the office, refer dispute to the Collector who shall decide it, as far as possible, within 30 days from the date on which it was received by him and his decision shall be final.”
. A bare reading of the above quoted sub-section makes it clear that the appeal before the Collector is maintainable only against the final order of recalling. In the present case no final order of recalling has been passed. Therefore, appeal before the Collector under this provision has rightly not been filed by respondent no.5.
3. Also Rule 5 of the Rules reads as under :
“5. Revision.- (1) (a) The State Government, the Commissioner, the Director of Panchayat, the Collector may on its/his own motion or on the application by any party, at any time for the purpose of satisfying itself/himself as to the legality or propriety of any order passed by or as to the regularity of the proceeding of, the authority subordinate to it/him call for and examine the record of any case pending before, or disposed of by, such authority and may pass such order in reference thereto as it/he may think fit: Provided that it/he shall not vary or reverse any order unless notice has been served on the parties interested and opportunity given to them for being heard: Provided further that no application for revision shall be entertained against an order appealable under the Act. (b) An application for revision by any party shall only be entertained if it is on the point of law and not on facts. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- rule (1),- (i) Where proceedings in respect of any case have been commenced by the State Government under sub-rule (1) no action shall be taken by other Officer mentioned in the said sub-rule in respect thereof, and (ii) Where proceedings in respect of any such case have been commenced by the Officer mentioned in sub-rule (1), the State Government may either refrain from taking any action under this rule in respect of such case until the final disposal of such proceeding by such officer or may withdraw such proceeding and pass such order as it may deem fit.”
. This Rule does not bar respondent no.2 from entertaining a revision merely because no appeal is filed by respondent no.5. In fact wide powers including suo motu powers are conferred on the revisional authority to satisfy as to the legality and propriety of any order passed by the authority subordinate to it.
4. I, therefore, find no merit in the petition. It is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE ss