Important Point – Unwarranted suspension from service cannot be sustained.

C.L. Soni, J. (Oral) - The matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal with consent of learned advocates for the parties. Hence, RULE. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Janak Raval for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned advocate Mr. C.P. Chaniyara for respondent No.3 waive service of Rule. Respondent Nos.4 to 6 being formal parties, Rule is not required to be issued to them.

2. By the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 5.12.2014 passed in Appeal No.83 of 2014 preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 24.9.2014 passed by respondent No.3- District Development Officer suspending the petitioner from the office of the Sarpanch in exercise of the powers under Section 59 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993 (‘the Act’).

3. The case of the petitioner is that one Somabhai Rajabhai Rathod since established an Unit of grinding bones just at the distance 200 to 300 meters from the residential area of the village, the petitioner as a Sarpanch wrote to the Pollution Board on 26.11.2013 and to other authorities on behalf of the people of the village who suffered lot of hardships and unbearable smell coming out on account of grinding bones. On such application made by the petitioner, site inspection of such Unit was carried out by the officer of the Gujarat Pollution Control Board and having found substance in the grievance raised by the petitioner, it was assured by the Board to take needful action. It is further case of the petitioner that since immediate action was not taken, the matter was pursued as drinking water for the people of the village started getting polluted and it was thereafter, the Board passed order under Section 31 of the Air Pollution (Prevention and Control) Act,1981 dated 3.1.2014 for closure of the manufacturing process, wherein it is found recorded that the Unit was established without obtaining prior permission of the Board and such Unit was run by removing dead animals from the gaucher land. It is further case of the petitioner that the petitioner filed written complaint dated 17.2.2014 against owner of the Unit Mr. Somabhai Rathod with Rajula Police Station so as to see that manufacturing activity of crushing bones may not spread diseases in the village. However, grievances raised by the petitioner and the villagers were not liked by owner of the Unit Shri Somabhai Rathod and his son and he then started threatening the petitioner and other persons for which the petitioner gave one more complaint on 17.2.2014. It is also averred in the petition that on the basis of the order made by the Gujarat Pollution Control Board, the electricity company was instructed to disconnect the electric connection of the Unit. Thereafter, the electric connection of the Unit was discontinued pursuant to the order dated 26.2.2014 made by the Board. But, on account of such actions, said Shri Somabhai Rathod issued notice dated 20.3.2014 to the petitioner stating that he was holding licence for running the Unit and as per the Rules and Regulations, he was running the Unit but he was being unnecessarily harassed as he belonged to Scheduled Tribe community and that removal of a person belonging to Scheduled tribe from his land or taking away of his rights would amount to an offence of atrocity and if the petitioner did not withdraw the complaint made against him, he would take necessary legal actions under the Atrocity Act against the petitioner. As per the case of the petitioner, it is thereafter said Shri Somabhai Rathod lodged the complaint on 26.5.2014 against the petitioner and other three persons under Sections 323, 324, 394, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 3, 5, 10, 3(2), 5 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, alleging assault and snatching away of golden chain from his neck and hurling dis-respective words (derogatory wo