SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 134

K. T. THOMAS, SHIVARAJ V. PATIL, S. P. BHARUCHA
AJIT SINGH – Appellant
Versus
FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellants were suspended from service as Sarpanch and Panch under the provisions of Section 51(1)(a) of the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 by an order dated 30-11-2000 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Mohindergarh. Section 51(1)(a) permits the suspension of a Sarpanch ''where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, enquiry or trial, if in the opinion of the Director or Deputy Commissioner concerned the charge made or proceeding taken against him, is likely to embarrass him in the discharge of his duties or involves moral turpitude or defect of character".

The provision requires, as a precondition, the forming of the opinion that the charge made or proceeding taken against the Sarpanch or Panch is likely to embarrass him in the discharge of his duties or it involves moral turpitude or defect of character. The order of the Deputy Commissioner, Mohindergarh records no such opinion.

3. The appellants preferred an appeal under Section 51(5) of the Act which was dismissed by the Financial Commissioner. The order seems to proceed upon the basis that the show-cause notice which had been served upon the appellants before



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top