IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that the suspension of an elected Sarpanch was unjustified as the conditions for suspension were not met, emphasizing the distinction between elected representatives and public servants.

ORDER :

Nupur Bhati, J.

1. Though the matter was listed in the 'Fresh' category, upon the joint request of both the counsel, the matter was heard finally on 27.11.2024.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 01.07.2024 passed by the respondent no. 2, Joint Secretary-cum-Deputy Commissioner (Enquiry), Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department, Jaipur, whereby the petitioner has been suspended from the post of Sarpanch.

2. The writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:-

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed and by any other appropriate writ, order or direction:

(A) The impugned order dated 01.07.2024 (Annex.3) passed by the respondent no.2 may kindly be quashed and set aside;

(B) Any other appropriate order, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed in favour of petitioner.

(C) Allow cost of the writ petition to the petitioner.”

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was elected as Ward Panch while his wife was elected as the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat Ghanerao, in 2015. On 01.04.2015 (Annex.1), an FIR was lodged against both the petitioner and his wife alleging that his wife did not have the requisite educational qualification of having passed Class VIII and that, while submitting the nomination form of the wife of the petitioner, she submitted a transfer certificate of Class VIII, which was allegedly a forged document.

4. Thereafter, charges were framed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Desuri against the petitioner and his wife vide order dated 10.01.2018 (Annex.2), against which the petitioner and his wife filed a revision before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali which was allowed vide order dated 19.03.2019 while setting aside the order dated 10.01.2018 (Annex.2), however, the learned Revisional Court had remanded the matter back to the learned Trial Court for fresh consideration. The complainant thereafter challenged the order dated 19.03.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali in 2023 before this Court, which came to be allowed by this Court, while observing that there was no need for the learned Revisional Court regarding the framing of charges and the learned Trial Court was directed to commence the trial in accordance with law. In the meanwhile, the petitioner and his wife were suspended vide order dated 07.03.2018 and 16.03.2018, respectively.

5. Subsequently, the petitioner was elected as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Ghanerao, Panchayat Samiti Desuri, Zilla Pali, in the elections conducted on 22.01.2020, however vide order dated 01.07.2024 (Annex.3), the respondent no.2 suspended the petitioner from the post of Sarpanch. Thus, aggrieved of the order passed by the respondent no.2, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also submitted that this Court vide order dated 18.11.2024, in the S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 8135 of 2024, titled Santosh Kumari and Anr. v. State of Rajasthan and Anr. has quashed the FIR and all other criminal proceedings initiated thereto, against the petitioner and his wife on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties to the proceedings and therefore, the suspension order passed by the respondent no.2 is left with no substance inasmuch as the respondent no. 2 has suspended the petitioner on the ground of pending criminal proceedings, which have already been quashed by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 18.11.2024.

7. Per contra, learned AAG raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition, as the appropriate authority which is empowered for revision or review of the impugned order dated 01.07.2024 (Annex.3), is the State Government as mentioned under Section 97 of the Act of 1994, and therefore, th