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

1994 Supreme(Guj) 21

J.N.BHATT
ANISHBHAI ISHABHAI PATEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: H.S.MUNSHAW, J.S.Yadav, S.P.DAVE

BHATT, J.

( 1 ) THE grievance voiced by the petitioner in this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, is that his removal from membership of gram panchayat and resultant disqualification is unjust and illegal.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts giving birth to this petition shortly may be stated firstly. The petitioner was a member of Sanjeli gram panchayat against whom proceedings came to be initiated for his removal on account of various complaints, under the provisions of Sec. 49 of the Gujarat panchayats Act, 1961 (the Panchayat Act for short ). It appears that the petitioner has wrongly mentioned in the petition that he is removed from the membership of the Panchmahals Jilla Panchayat. Unfortunately, the petition is founded upon a fact wrongly conceived that the petitioner is removed from the membership of Jilla Panchayat instead of mentioning the gram panchayat. Apart from that, the case of the petitioner is that provisions of Sec. 49 (1) of the Panchayat Act were not attracted and his removal under the said provisions is unjust, illegal and contrary to the provisions of the Panchayat Act.

( 3 ) THE defence of the respondent-authority disclosed in the affidavit - in-reply

















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