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

2010 Supreme(MP) 360

SHANTANU KEMKAR
Mahesh – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Ajay Jain for petitioner; Vivek Patwa, Deputy Government Advocate, for respondents No.1 & 3 to 6 and Romesh Dave for respondent No.2.

ORDER

1. Aggrieved by the order dated 23.3 .2010 (Annexure P-17) passed by the Competent Authority of the State Government allowing the revision filed by the 2nd respondent against the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, the petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of his petition are that petitioner was appointed on the post of Panchayat Karmi vide resolution dated 12.4.2006 passed by the Gram Panchayat Walka, Tahsil Bhikangaon, District Khargone on the basis of the majority. The said resolution of appointment of the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi was assailed by the 2nd respondent before the Collector Khargone. The Collector Khargone vide order dated 21.3.2007 (Annexure P-9) recorded the finding that the resolution of the Panchayat appointing the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi is legal and just at the same time he also held that the said resolution Cannot be cancelled by him under the provisions of section 85 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhniyam. He accordingly dismissed the case filed by the 2nd respondent.

3. Aggrieved the 2nd respondent filed a Writ Petition No







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