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

2011 Supreme(MP) 491

SANJAY YADAV
Dinesh Pawar – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


ORDER

Hon'ble Mr. Sanjay Yadav, J.

1. Heard.

2. Resolution dated 21-7-2006 is being challenged in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. By said resolution services of the petitioner as Panchayat Karmi, Gram Panchayat, Bijakwada, Janpad Panchayat Parasiya, District Chhindwara has been terminated.

4. The petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Karmi of said Gram Panchayat on 13-10-2001 in accordance with Scheme, i.e., Panchayat Karmi Yojana, 1995.

5. That, there were complaints against the petitioner regarding misuse of funds of various scheme such as SGRY Food Scheme, Indira Awas Scheme, Midday meal. As also misuse of funds in purchasing materials for the Panchayat. These allegations paved the foundation for passing of impugned resolution.

6. Petitioner challenges the resolution on the ground that the scheme has been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing and on the basis of enquiry held behind his back.

7. Placing reliance on the decision in Kunjan Singh Vs. State of M.P. and Others, 2003 (3) M.P.H.T. 370 : 2003 (4) MPLJ 284,- and Kailash Babu Rai Vs. State of M.P. and Others, 2008 (3) MPLJ 648, it is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner















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