K.M. Thaker, J.

1. Heard Mr. K.R. Patel, learned advocate, for Mr. Munshaw, learned advocate for the petitioner panchayat. None for the respondent.

1.1 At the outset, it is necessary to mention that though served and represented by the learned advocate, the respondent has not attended the hearing.

With a view to granting opportunity to the respondent to attend the hearing and oppose the submissions by the petitioner, the hearing of this petition was adjourned on more than 5 occasions. Despite such opportunities, the respondent has not cared to attend the hearing of present petition. Under the circumstances, the Court has proceeded to decide the petition in absence of the respondent, after considering the material available on record and the submissions on behalf of the petitioner panchayat.

1.2 It is also necessary to mention that the Court proceeded to hear and decide present petition in absence of the respondent also for the reason that the petition is pending since 2005 and total number of adjournments granted in this petition is 49 and that therefore, the Court considered it necessary and appropriate to decide the matter finally.

2. In present petition, the petitioner panc