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

1988 Supreme(Guj) 125

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :M.B.SHAH
SALAMBHAI LAKHABHAI KHANT - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
S.C.A. 2678 of 1988
Decided On : 08/16/1988

Advocates Appeared: H.B.ANTANI, VITTHALBHAI PATEL

Headnote:

Gujarat Panchayats Act – Sections 111 (1) (2), 305, 110, 51(12),116 – Gujarat Taluka and District Panchayat (Procedure) Rules 1963 – Rule 13 – Electoral Issue – Resolutions – The meeting of the Taluka Panchayat Balasinor was called to consider the budget and constitute the Executive Committee and Social Justice Committee – In the said meeting budget was not passed – For that Resolution No. 1 was passed rejecting the approval of the budget – Election of the Executive Committee was held and as per Resolution No. 2 members who secured more votes were declared to be elected as members of the Executive Committee – Below the said resolutions and the proceedings there are the signatures of the Taluka Development Officer Balasinor and the President of the Taluka Panchayat Balasinor – Thereafter there is a note by the President that he was not agreeing with the Resolutions Nos. 1 to 3 because there was violation of the Act – Held, Therefore it can be said that notice of the hearing is served to the petitioners through the Taluka Panchayat – Further it is also an admitted fact that members of the Social Justice Committee continued to function till the petition was filed – Only because of stay order from this Court they could not function – The Development Commissioner had stayed the operation of the resolution by his order – Inspite of the stay order minutes of the resolution were confirmed in the meeting held – Therefore if the petitioners were aggrieved by the show cause notice and the stay order granted by the Development Commissioner the petitioners could have approached the Development Commissioner for modification – From the aforesaid facts it cannot be said that the order passed by the Additional Development Commissioner is without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners – Further as the resolution passed by the panchayat is without any authority of law in court view the order passed by the Additional Development Commissioner does not call for any interference – Petition Rejected

M. B. SHAH, J.

( 1 ) BEING aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 17/05/1988 passed by the Additional Development Commissioner Gujarat State in Revision Application No. 136 of 1987 the petitioners have filed this revision application. By the impugned order Additional Development Commissioner has set aside the Resolution dated 30-6-1987 as per agenda No. 1 passed by the Taluka Panchayat Balasinor district Kheda.

( 2 ) ON 27/03/1987 the meeting of the Taluka Panchayat Balasinor was called to consider the budget for the year 1987-88 and constitute the Executive Committee and Social Justice Committee. In the said meeting budget for the year 1987-88 was not passed. For that Resolution No. 1 was passed rejecting the approval of the budget. Election of the Executive Committee was held and as per Resolution No. 2 members who secured more votes were declared to be elected as members of the Executive Committee. By Resolution No. 3 members who had secured more votes were declared to have been elected as members of the Social Justice Committee. These Committees were constituted as per the provisions of Sec. 111 (1) and (2) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act. Other resolutions were also passed in the said meeting. Below the said resolutions and the proceedings there are the signatures of the Taluka Development Officer Balasinor and the President of the Taluka Panchayat Balasinor. Thereafter there is a note by the President that he was not agreeing with the Resolutions Nos. 1 to 3 because there was violation of the Act which disqualifies the persons who change the party. As par the endorsement below it the copies of the said resolutions were sent to all members of the Taluka Panchayat to the District Development Officer Kheda and all branches of Taluka Panchayat Balasinor and also one copy was placed on the Notice Board in the office of the Taluka Panchayat.

( 3 ) THEREAFTER the meeting of the Taluka Panchayat was held on 20/06/1987 In that meeting minutes of the meeting of 27/03/1987 were placed for confirmation. Minutes were not confirmed and resolution was passed for reconstituting Executive Committee and Social Justice Committee. Proposals for appointing 9 persons as members of the Executive Committee and 10 persons as members of the Social Justice Committee were approved. At that time the Taluka Development Officer pointed out that under Rule 13a of the Gujarat Taluka and District Panchayats (Procedure) Rules 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Procedure Rules) the aforesaid resolution cannot be passed and therefore he was not agreeing to it.

( 4 ) THEREAFTER the Chairman of the Social Justice Committee filed Civil Suit No. 87 of 1987 before the Civil Judge (J. D.) at Balasinor challenging the proceedings of the meeting held on 30/06/1987 In the Affidavit-in-reply filed by respondent No 9 it has been stated that the Chairman of the Social Justice Committee went on hunger strike on 1-8-1987 and about 15 persons including members of the Taluka Panchayat joined him. On the same day at about 4-30 p. m. the President of the Taluka Panchayat agreed for an overall compromise and it was further agreed that Resolution dated 30/06/1987 would be treated as void and that the suit filed in the Civil Court would be withdrawn. In pursuance of the said agreement the civil suit was withdrawn.

( 5 ) THEREAFTER the Development Commissioner Gujarat issued a show cause notice dated 5-10-1987 (Annexure I) to the Taluka Panchayat stating as to why the proceedings of the meeting of 30/06/1987 should not be set aside under Sec. 305 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act. It was further ordered that prima facie the proceedings of the held on 30/06/1987 were found to be illegal and hence by the interim order its operation was stayed. Hearing for interim order was fixed on 19-10-1987. In the said notice it is stated that the said show cause notice be placed in the meeting of the Taluka Panchayat and written reply be sent and the time of hearing of the matte




















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
whatsapp-icon Back to top