(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA)

By way of the present application, the applicant, newly elected Sarpanch of Bandra Village Panchayat, Tal. Gondal, Dist. Rajkot has prayed to review/recall the order passed by this Court dated 10th May, 2011 in LPA No. 2593 of 2010, arising from judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge in SCA No. 10991 of 2010.

2. The facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this application and also giving rise to this application can be summarized as under:-

2.1 Respondent No.1 was elected as Sarpanch of Bandra Village Panchayat, Tal. Gondal, Dist. Rajkot and assumed post of Sarpanch on 28th January, 2007. While holding the office of Sarpanch, he came to be served with a show cause notice issued by the District Development Officer, Rajkot, under Section 57(1) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993 (for short "the Act"), calling upon respondent No.1 to explain certain charges of misconduct in discharge of his duties as Sarpanch. Pursuant to the same, the District Development Officer, Rajkot, vide order dated 15th February, 2010, in exercise of powers under Section 57(1) of the Act, ordered removal of respondent No.1 from the office of Sarpanch, Bandra Village Panchayat.

2.2 Respondent No.1 preferred appeal before the State Government under the provisions of Section 57(3) of the Act, which also came to be dismissed confirming the order of removal from the post of Sarpanch passed by the District Development Officer, Rajkot. The orders passed by the authorities under the Act were subject matter of challenge before the learned Single Judge in a writ petition being SCA No. 10991 of 2010. Learned Single Judge also rejected the petition confirming the orders passed by the District Development Officer, Rajkot and the Additional Development Commissioner, State of Gujarat.

2.3 Respondent No.1 preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 2593 of 2010, which was taken up for hearing by this Court.

2.4 After hearing the respective parties and perusal of the record, this Court came to the conclusion that it was not possible to hold that the case of respondent No.1 - original petitioner falls within the ambit of Section 57 of the Act. This Court took the view that in a democracy governed by rule of law, once elected to an office in a democratic institution, the person elected is entitled to hold the office for the term for which he has been elected and removal of a Sarpanch from his office on flimsy charges and accusations is a serious matter as it curtails the statutory term of the holder of the office and it would also cast a stigma on the holder of the office.

2.5 Vide judgment and order dated 10th May, 2011, we allowed the appeal quashing and setting aside the orders passed by the authorities under the Act as well as the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge and also further ordered that respondent No.1 herein i.e. original petitioner is allowed to resume his office of Sarpanch.

2.6 It appears that before the original petitioner i.e. respondent No.1 herein could prefer appeal, a Notification came to be issued on 27th December, 2010 for holding fresh election, as the post of Sarpanch fell vacant. The applicant herein filed his nomination paper and contested the election, and he was declared elected and assumed the office of Sarpanch.

3. It is the case of the applicant that all these facts were not brought to the notice of this Court and therefore, this Court was unable to take cognizance of the subsequent events which took place between the date of removal of respondent No.1 from the office of Sarpanch, till the date of passing of the judgment and order in appeal. It is the case of the applicant that since he has already been elected as a Sarpanch, this Court could not have passed an order allowing respondent No.1 to resume his office of Sarpanch. Under these set of facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant has prayed to recall or review the part of the order where this Court ha