ORDER :

1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken-up through video conferencing.

2. The petitioner herein calls in question legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 5.11.2009 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Collector, Kabirdham, by which revision preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed affirming the order dated 8.4.2009 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bodla setting aside the resolution dated 23.9.2007 selecting the petitioner on the post of Panchayat Karmi, Gram Panchayat Chanta, Tahsil Bodla, District Kabirdham.

3. Gram Panchayat Chanta through its Sarpanch issued an advertisement on 16.4.2007 inviting applications for selection and appointment on the post of Panchayat Karmi in which the petitioner and respondent No.4 participated and thereafter in the meeting of General Body held by said Gram Panchayat on 23.9.2007 selected the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi, but subject to approval of Gram Sabha in accordance with the provisions contained in the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter called as 'the Adhiniyam 1993') and on 4.10.2007 the concerned Gram Sabha approved the selection of the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi unanimously and thereafter on 24.10.2007 the petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Karmi for Gram Panchayat Chanta and thereafter by order dated 5.11.2007 (Annexure P-5) the Deputy Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare, Kabirdham being the Prescribed Authority appointed the petitioner as Panchayat Secretary for Gram Panchayat Chanta. Against the resolution dated 23.9.2007 selecting the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi, respondent No.4 herein preferred an appeal under Section 91 of the Adhiniyam 1993 read with Rule 3(d) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayats (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter called as 'Rules of 1995') before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bodla, in which he called in question the selection of the petitioner on the post of Panchayat Karmi. The SDO, Bodla by order dated 8.4.2009 (Annexure P-6) set-aside the selection made by resolution No.1 dated 23.9.2007 passed by Gram Panchayat Chanta for the reasons recorded therein and appointed respondent No.4 by that order. Feeling aggrieved against the order dated 8.4.2009 (Annexure P-6) passed by the SDO, Bodla, the petitioner preferred revision before the Collector, Kabirdham. The Collector, Kabirdham by the impugned order dated 5.11.2009 (Annexure P-7) affirmed the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bodla and dismissed the revision, resulting into filing of the present writ petition by the petitioner before this Court questioning the order passed by the SDO and the Collector branding the same as arbitrary and illegal stating inter-alia that appeal as framed and filed under Section 91 of the Adhiniyam 1993 read with Rule 3(d) of the Rules of 1995 before the SDO was not maintainable.

4. Return has been filed by respondent No.4 stating inter-alia that the petitioner's appointment on the post of Panchayat Karmi has rightly been set-aside by the SDO and the writ petition as framed and filed deserves to be dismissed having no merit.

5. Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner, would make solitary contention that by resolution dated 23.9.2007 General Body of Gram Panchayat Chanta has only resolved to select the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi subject to approval of Gram Sabha of the concerned village and thereafter Gram Panchayat Chanta by its order dated 24.10.2007 has only appointed him, therefore, the order dated 24.10.2007 is appealable under Section 91 of the Adhiniyam 1993 read with Rule 3(d) of the Rules of 1995 and the resolution dated 23.9.2007 was not appealable, as such, appeal was not maintainable before the SDO and the SDO has committed legal error in entertaining the appeal against the resolution dated 23.9.2007 and overstepping its jurisdiction b