Dinesh Kumar Shukla Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1047156
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnMar-26-2013
AppellantDinesh Kumar Shukla
RespondentThe State of Madhya Pradesh
Excerpt:
1 w.p.no.4967/2013 26/3/2013: shri mrigendra singh with shri kuldeep singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. issue notice to the respondent. at this stage shri rajesh kumar pandey, learned counsel appears for respondent no.6. a copy of petition along with annexures be served on shri pandey, who may seek instructions and file reply. notice be issued to other respondents on payment of p.f.within one week. it is seen that petitioner is an elected sarpanch and vide order dated 16.11.2012 annexure p/13 the sub divisional officer has exercised the power under section 40(1) of m.p.panchayat raj avam gram swaraj adhiniyam, 1993 and removed the petitioner. petitioner is removed only because a direction to pay rs.1,45,978/- to one smt. leela devi has not been complied with . however, the contention of the petitioner is that before exercising the powers under section 40 of the adhiniyam no enquiry has been conducted, no show cause notice has been given and no opportunity of defense is extended to the petitioner. petitioner is legally elected sarpanch and he has been removed in an illegal manner that also contrary to the principles of natural justice. prima facie contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seems to be correct. even though learned counsel for respondent no.6 tried to emphasize that opportunity was granted but no material is available before this court neither does the order passed by the sub divisional officer not the orders passed by the appellate 2 authority and revisional authority shows that the order was passed under section 40 after giving opportunity to the petitioner and after conducting enquiry. prima facie it is clear that order has been passed in an illegal manner. in view of the above, operation of the order dated 16.11.2012 annexure p/13 passed by the sub divisional officer and orders annexure p/1 and p/2 passed by the appellate authority and revisional authority are directed to be stayed till the next date of listing. respondents to file reply on or before 22.4.2013. list the matter on 23.4.2013. c.c.today. (rajendra menon) judge mrs.mishra
Judgment:

1 W.P.No.4967/2013 26/3/2013: Shri Mrigendra Singh with Shri Kuldeep Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Issue notice to the respondent.

At this stage Shri Rajesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appears for respondent No.6.

A copy of petition along with annexures be served on Shri Pandey, who may seek instructions and file reply.

Notice be issued to other respondents on payment of P.F.within one week.

It is seen that petitioner is an elected Sarpanch and vide order dated 16.11.2012 Annexure P/13 the Sub Divisional Officer has exercised the power under Section 40(1) of M.P.Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 and removed the petitioner.

Petitioner is removed only because a direction to pay Rs.1,45,978/- to one Smt.

Leela Devi has not been complied with .

However, the contention of the petitioner is that before exercising the powers under Section 40 of the Adhiniyam no enquiry has been conducted, no show cause notice has been given and no opportunity of defense is extended to the petitioner.

Petitioner is legally elected Sarpanch and he has been removed in an illegal manner that also contrary to the principles of natural justice.

Prima facie contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner seems to be correct.

Even though learned counsel for respondent No.6 tried to emphasize that opportunity was granted but no material is available before this Court neither does the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer not the orders passed by the Appellate 2 Authority and Revisional Authority shows that the order was passed under Section 40 after giving opportunity to the petitioner and after conducting enquiry.

Prima facie it is clear that order has been passed in an illegal manner.

In view of the above, operation of the order dated 16.11.2012 Annexure P/13 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer and orders Annexure P/1 and P/2 passed by the Appellate Authority and Revisional Authority are directed to be stayed till the next date of listing.

Respondents to file reply on or before 22.4.2013.

List the matter on 23.4.2013.

c.c.today.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge Mrs.mishra