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

2008 Supreme(MP) 1021

A.M. Naik, J.
Abdul Hasan Qureshi v. State of M.P. and others
Writ Petitions No.7163 and 7007 of 2008 (Jabalpur);
Decided on 25.9.2008.

Advocates:
K.K. Trivedi for petitioner;
Vinod Mehta, Government Advocate for respondents No.1 & 2;
Sanjay Patel for respondent No.3.

Headnote:(1) Panchayats (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995 (M.P.) -- R.3 -M.P. Panchayat Karmi Yojna -- resolution of Gram Panchayat selecting and appointing a Panchayat Karmi -- amounts to an order -- appealable before the prescribed authority.

        Resolution of Gram Panchayat selecting and appointing thereby a Panchayat Karmi amounts to an order in substance of Gram Panchayat and would be appealable under rule 3 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayats (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995 before the prescribed authority. 2009(1) JLJ 7 relied on. 2000(1) JLJ 280 already overruled.

       [Para 22

        (2) Panchayats (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995 (M.P.) -- Rr.3 and 5 -- resolution of Gram Panchayat merely selecting Panchayat Karmi -- not an order hence not appealable -- revision against such proceeding is also not maintainable.

        Resolution of Gram Panchayat merely selecting thereby a Panchayat Karmi and not appointing thereby would not amount to an order, but would amount to merely a proceedings of Gram Panchayat and would not be appealable as an order under rule 3. Such a proceeding would not be open to challenge in revision under rule 5 because the Gram Panchayat cannot be said to be subordinate to any of the revisional authorities within the meaning of provisions of Panchayat Karmi Yojna. [Para 22

        (3) Panchayats (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995 (M.P.) - 5(2)(ii) -- second revision against the order of revisional authority lies before State Government -- it lies against order finally disposing of the case.

        Second revision before the State Government against the revisional order of the officers mentioned in rule 5 would lie after final disposal by such officers by virtue of clause (ii) of subd`rule (2) of rule 5. 2002(2) JLJ 89, 2007(1) Vidhi Bhasvar 284, 1972 JLJ 934 (FB) and 1975 JLJ 48 (FB) relied on. 2008(1) JLJ 329 distinguished. [Para 22

       ¼1½ iapk;r ¼vihy ,oa iqujh{k.k½ fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ && fu-3 && e-iz- iapk;r dehZ ;kstuk && iapk;rdehZ dk p;u rFkk fu;qfDr djus dk xzke iapk;r dk ladYi && vkns‘k dh dksfV esa vkrk gS && fofgr izkf/kdkjh ds le{k vihyuh;A

        xzke iapk;r dk iapk;rdehZ dk p;u rFkk ,rn~okjk fu;qfDr djus dk ladYi lkjr% xzke iapk;r ds vkns‘k dh dksfV esa vkrk gS rFkk e/; izns‘k iapk;r ¼vihy ,oa iqujh{k.k½ fu;e] 1995 ds fu;e 3 ds v/khu fofgr izkf/kdkjh ds le{k vihyuh; gksxkA 2009¼1½ ts ,y ts 7 voyafcrA 2000¼1½ ts ,y ts 280 iwoZ esa gh myVk x;kA ¼iSjk 22½

        ¼2½ iapk;r ¼vihy ,oa iqujh{k.k½ fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ && fu-3 rFkk 5 && xzke iapk;r ds ladYi }kjk iapk;r dehZ dk p;u ek= && vkns‘k ugha vr% vihyuh; ugha && ,slh dk;Zokgh ds fo:) iqujh{k.k Hkh xzkg~; ugha gSA

        iapk;rdehZ dks ,rn~}kjk ek= pquus rFkk ,rn~}kjk fu;qDr ugha djus dk xzzke iapk;r dk ladYi vkns‘k dh dksfV esa ugha vk,xk] vfirq xzke iapk;r dh dk;Zokgh ek= dh dksfV esaa vk,xk rFkk fu;e 3 ds v/khu vkns‘k ds :i esa vihyuh; ugha gksxkA ,slh dk;Zokgh dk fu-5 ds v/khu iqujh{k.k ds v/khu vk{ksi ugha fd;k tk ldsxk D;ksafd xzke iapk;r dks iapk;r dehZ ds ;kstuk ds mica/kksa ds vFkkZarxZr fdUgha Hkh iqujh{k.k izkf/kdkfj;ksa ds v/khuLFk ugha dgk tk ldrkA ¼iSjk 22½

        ¼3½ iapk;r ¼vihy ,oa iqujh{k.k½ fu;e] 1995 ¼e-iz-½ && fu-5¼2½¼nks½ && iqujh{k.k izkf/kdkjh ds fo:) f}rh; iqujh{k.k jkT; ljdkj ds le{k gksxk && og ekeys dks vafrer% fuiVkus okys vkns‘k ds fo:) gksxkA

        fu;e 5 ds mfYyf[kr vf/kdkfj;ksa ds iqujh{k.k vkns‘k ds fo:) jkT; ljdkj ds le{k f}rh; iqujh{k.k ,sls vf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk fu;e 5 ds mifu;e ¼2½ ds [kaM ¼nks½ ds vafre fuiVkjs ds Ik‘pkr~ gksxkA 2002¼2½ ts ,y ts 89] 2007¼1½ fof/k HkkLoj 284] 1972 ts ,y ts 934 ¼iw.kZ U;k;ihB½ rFkk 1975 ts ,y ts 48 ¼iw.kZ U;k;ihB½ voyafcrA 2008¼1½ ts ,y ts 329 izHksfnrA

       ¼iSjk 22½

ORDER

1. This order disposes of Writ Petition No.7007/08 and Writ Petition No.7163/08. Reference to annexures is taken from Writ Petition No.7163/ 08 is hereinafter described as 'A' and of Writ Petition No.7007/08 is hereinafter described as 'R'.

2. Short facts involved in the petitions are that an advertisement marked as Annexure P-4 was issued on 5.8.2007 by Gram Panchayat Magron, Block Batiyagarh, District Damoh, inviting applications thereby for the post of Panchayat Karmi in the said Gram Panchayat. Petitioners of both the writ petitions and certain other applicants made their respective applications pursuant to the said advertisement. A meeting of the Gram Panchayat was convened and after considering the applications, 'A' was selected and appointed by majority of Panchas for the post of Panchayat Kami and a resolution to this effect was passed on 29.8.2007 vide Annexure P-5. An order of appointment was, accordingly, issued in favour of 'A' on 29.8.2007 vide Annexure P-6. Pursuant thereto 'A' gave his joining on 31.8.2007. Collector Damoh issued necessary notification declaring 'A' as Panchayat Karmi vide his order dated 12.10.2007 vide Annexure P-10. 'R' challenged the appointment of 'A' before the Sub-Divisional Officer Hata, District Damoh, by way of filing an appeal on the ground that she was more meritorious in compa'rison to 'A'. Appeal was rejected on 8.10.2007 vide Annexure P-11.

3. Aggrieved by it, 'R' preferred a revision wherein learned Additional Collector Damoh granted stay on 5.10.2007 in her favour. 'A' submitted an application under Order 7, rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure before the Additional Collector that no appeal was provided before the Sub-Divisional Officer against the resolution and, therefore, the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer on 8.10.2007 vide Annexure P-11 is without jurisdiction and hence not revisable. However, the learned Additional Collector rejected this objection and maintained the stay order on 4.12.2007 vide Annexure P-12. This was further challenged by 'A' before this Court in Writ Petition No. 17225/07 . Learned Single Judge on 18.1.2008 directed for maintenance of status quo. From the record, it seems that ultimately this writ petition bearing WP No. 17225/07 was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court on 9.4.2008 with a direction that 'A' will be allowed to continue as Panchayat Karmi/Secretary of Gram Panchayat Magron subject to the result of the revision pending before the revisional authority. The revisional authority (Additional Collector Damoh), ultimately, vide order dated 28.5.2008 marked as Annexure P-15, allowed the revision holding that 'R' was the most meritorious amongst the applicants and was entitled to be appointed on the post of Panchayat Karmi on Gram Panchayat Magron. Accordingly, the appointment of 'A' was held illegal and was cancelled. 'R' was directed to be appointed on the said post and the Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Batiyagarh was directed to issue the appointment order in her favour. Aggrieved by the same, 'A'; preferred second revision before the State Minister for Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, who vide her order dated 9.6.2008 marked as Annexure P-18, stayed the order of the Additional Collector dated 28.5.2008 (Annexure P-15) and remitted the matter for final adjudication to the Commissioner, Sagar Division.

4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid 'R' submitted Writ Petition No.7007/08 on the ground that the order of the State Minister contained in Annexure P-18 (Annexure P-2 in Writ Petition No.7007/08) is without jurisdiction because second revision is not maintainable in law.

5. Faced with the aforesaid situation, 'A' preferred Writ Petition No. 7163/08 on the ground that the resolution of Gram Panchayat marked as Annexure P-5, was not appealable before the Sub-Divisional Officer and, consequently, the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 8.10.2007 (Annexure P-11) is nullity






































































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 Back to top