Chhattisgarh Court June 2003 Judgments
Radheshyam Yadu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jun-30-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT63(CG)
ORDERL.C. Bhadoo, J.1. Heard.2. By this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the order dated 6-6-2003 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent No. 2 by which it has been ordered that under Rule 33 of Chhattisgarh Panchayat Service (Recruitment and General Conditions of Services) Rules, 1999, on attaining the age of superannuation the petitioner would be deemed to be retired from 30th June, 2003.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as Accountant in Zila Panchayat, Mahasamund. As per the Rules prevailing in the department he is entitled to continue till the completion of 60 years of age. The respondent No, 1 has earlier issued a memo/order 8-4-2002 (Annexure P-2) and directed the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to send proposals with regard to allowing benefit of Fifth Pay Commission, pension and age of superannuation. In compliance of the said order dated 8-4-2002 the Zila Panchayat, Mahasamund ha...
Tag this Judgment!Budhram Vs. Sub-divisional Officer (Revenue) and ors.
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jun-23-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT1(CG)
ORDERP.C. Naik, J. 1. Heard2. In the election of Gram Panchayat, Puchheli held on 1-2-2000 the petitioner had contested for the post of Sarpanch and was declared elected. He secured 251 votes. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 had also contested for the said post, but lost. Subsequent thereto, an election petition was filed by the respondent No. 2 challenging the election of the petitioner on the ground that the illegal acceptance of nomination of respondent No. 3 had materially affected the election. It was also alleged that as the petitioner had indulged in corrupt practice, his election was liable to be set aside.3. After examining the matter the Election Tribunal vide its order dated 14-11-2000 allowed the election petition on the ground of illegal acceptance of the nomination paper of respondent No. 3 who belonged to Ghasiya Community and not to Back Ward Community for which the post was reserved. However, the challenge to the election of the writ petitioner on the ground of corrupt pra...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›