A subsequent removal order not contested by the petitioner nullifies prior claims, emphasizing the duty to disclose all relevant past orders in administrative appeals.

ORDER :

MANINDER S. BHATTI, J.

This petition has been filed while praying for the following reliefs:

"(i) That, this Hon'ble Court pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 25/08/2008 (Annexure P/23) of respondent No.2 being illegal, arbitrary, malafide and uncostitutional.

(ii) That this Hon'ble Court be further pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing to respondents to handover the charge of the post of Panchayat Karmi to petitioner in view of order dated 04/01/2008 of the appellate committee and appointment of respondent No.6 be quashed.

(iii) That, this Hon'ble Court also pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari/orders of Gram Sabha/Gram Panchayat by in illegal and arbitrary and un-constitutional manner.

(iv) Any other order/direction which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper also be passed looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, also be passed in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of justice."

2. As per the facts which are detailed in the petition, the petitioner herein was working as the Panchayat Karmi (Secretary), Gram Panchayat, Devalpur. One Lallu Singh and Others, made a complaint against the petitioner on 10/04/2007. On the receipt of the said complaint, an enquiry was directed to be conducted and an enquiry report was submitted by BDO on 22/05/2007 (Annexure P/2) and the charges were not found to be proved. However, the office bearers of Gram Panchayat, were subsequently pressurized and thus, a resolution dated 18/6/2007 (Annexure P/3) was passed by which the petitioner was sought to be removed from the post of Panchayat Karmi (Secretary). The resolution was followed by another order dated 30/06/2007 (Annexure P/4) by which the petitioner was removed on the basis of a decision of resolution. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal in terms of section 7 (H) of Panchayat Raj Adhininyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "Adhiniyam of 1993") (wrongly mentioned as Section 7(J) of the Adhiniyam of 1993), before the Appellate Committee which was consisted of President of Janpad Panchayat, member of Janpad Panchayat and Sub Divisional Officer. The Appellate Committee vide order dated 03/07/2007 (Annexure P/5), stayed the operation of resolution dated 18/6/2007 (Annexure P/3). As the Sub Divisional Officer, was not available when the order was passed by the Appellate Committee, therefore, the SDO was also approached separately by way of an appeal under Section 7 (H) of the Adhiniyam of 1993. The SDO also vide order dated 09/07/2007, stayed the operation of the resolution dated 18/06/2007.

3. After passing of an order dated 09/07/2007 (Annexure P/6), respondent No.5 made an attempt to appoint another person as Panchayat Karmi (Secretary) and issued the advertisement also. The said process was objected to by the petitioner. Even, respondent No.3 also restrained respondent No.4 to not to proceed with the process vide order dated 13/08/2007 (Annexure P/9). In the meantime, respondent No.5, preferred an appeal under Section 91 of the Adhiniyam of 1993, against the order dated 09/07/2007 passed by the SDO, Dindori. Respondent No.2, set aside the order dated 09/07/2007 passed by SDO, Dindori dated 28/09/2007. Against the order passed by respondent No.2, the petitioner preferred a petition before this Court vide W.P. No.14973 of 2007 and this Court disposed of the petition directing the Appellate Committee to take decision on the appeal in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Appellate Committee passed another interlocutory order which is contained in Annexure