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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 1678

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MUNNURI LAXMAN
FATEH SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CW / 2182 / 2026



##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2182/2026

Fateh Singh S/o Shri Dau Singh, Aged About 45 Years, Resident

Of Ganga Ji Ka Khera, Kudal Ki Gawar, Bheem, Rajsamand,

Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Rural

Development And Panchayati Raj Department,

Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad Rajsamand,

District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.

3. The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti

Devgarh, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Patel

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav, DGC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN

Order

30/01/2026

1. Heard on the interim application.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

was appointed by the Panchayat Samiti and is working as a Vikas

Adhikari (Village Development Officer) and his appointment was

made pursuant to a selection by the District Establishment

Committee. On the recommendation of the District Establishment

Committee, the Panchayat Samiti took the decision for

appointment and that decision has to be implemented by the

Block Development Officer or Khand Vikas Adhikari (Block

Development Officer). His appointing authority is only the

(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 04:48:21 PM)

(Downloaded on 31/01/2026 at 08:51:02 AM)

##PAGE2##

(2 of 3) [CW-2182/2026]

Panchayat Samiti. The suspension has to be made by the

Panchayat Samiti through its Executive Officer, who is the Block

Development Officer.

3. However, in the present case, the suspension order was

passed by the Chief Executive Officer, who is the Chief Executive

Officer of the Zila Parishad. The authority higher than the

Panchayat Samiti is the Zila Parishad. If, at all, the Zila Parishad is

the higher authority, then the appointing authority, i.e. the Zila

Parishad, has taken the decision to suspend and such decision can

be implemented by the Chief Executive Officer. However, in the

present case, such decision is being taken by the Chief Executive

Officer, which is not in accordance with the procedure and is

without jurisdiction in the eyes of law.

4. As seen from Rule 276 of the Rajasthan Civil Services

(Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958, the employees

relating to the Zila Parishad and the Panchayat Samiti have to be

appointed either by the Zila Parishad or by the Panchayat Samiti.

This means that the appointing authority is the Panchayat Samiti

in respect of employees to be appointed for the Panchayat Samiti

and the Zila Parishad is the appointing authority so far as

employees concerned with the Zila Parishad are concerned. The

Chief Executive Officer or the Block Development Officer are only

Executive Officers who are to execute the decisions of the Zila

Parishad or Panchayat Samiti respectively. In the absence of any

decision from the Zila Parishad for suspension, the Chief Executive

Officer has no independent authority to act unless it is shown that

such delegation is given by the Zila Parishad under any resolution.

(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 04:48:21 PM)

(Downloaded on 31/01/2026 at 08:51:02 AM)

##PAGE3##

(3 of 3) [CW-2182/2026]

In the present case, no such delegation or authorization is

evident, as seen from the impugned order.

5. In the said circumstances, the effect and operation of the

impugned order dated 23.01.2026 (Annex.4) issued by

respondent no.2-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Rajsamand,

as well as other consequential relieving orders, shall be stayed.

6. Admit.

7. Issue notice to the respondents.

8. Mr. Kuldeep Vaishnav, learned DGC appears and accepts

notice on behalf of all the respondents. Hence, service upon

respondents is treated as complete.

9. Learned counsel for the respondent is directed to file reply, if

any, by the next date of hearing.

10. Respondents are at liberty to file an application for seeking

vacation of interim order.

11. Post the matter on 19.03.2026

(MUNNURI LAXMAN),J

121-BhumikaP/-

(Uploaded on 30/01/2026 at 04:48:21 PM)

(Downloaded on 31/01/2026 at 08:51:02 AM)

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