Muneshi Devi vs State Of Rajasthan - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 11634

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 11634

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Anuroop Singhi, J
Muneshi Devi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6715/2026

Important Points

The removal of a Gram Panchayat Administrator must strictly comply with the procedural requirements set forth in Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996.

Subject

Civil - Administrative Law

Act Referred

Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994: S.38
Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996: R.22

Headnote

(A) Panchayati Raj Law - Removal of Administrator - Statutory Compliance - Removal of an Administrator (outgoing Sarpanch) without adhering to the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 is subject to judicial review. (Para 2)

Issues: Whether the removal of the petitioner from the post of Administrator was in compliance with the provisions of Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Narpat Singh Shekhawat
For the Respondents:

Order

1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 06.04.2026 (Annexure-1), vide which the petitioner has been removed from the post of Administrator (outgoing Sarpanch) of Gram Panchayat Kankariya, Panchayat Samiti Lalsot, District Dausa.

2. Mr. Narpat Singh Shekhawat, learned counsel for the petitioner submits the manner in which the impugned order has been passed fails to demonstrate even a whisper of compliance of the provisions of Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1994’), read with Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1996’).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court on 18.08.2025 in the case of Mahaveer Prasad Gautam Vs. State of Rajasthan in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3422/2025 and other connected matters have duly considered the very same controversy and quashed the orders passed by the respondents in defiance and ignorance of the provisions of Section 38 of the Act of 1994 read with Rule 22 of the Rules of 1996.

4. It is also submitted that though against the said judgment, Special Appeal Writ was filed wherein, the effect and operation of the said judgment was stayed by the Division Bench in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.1016/2025, however, thereafter, the said interim order was further assailed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP (C) No.31575/2025 wherein the effect and operation of the interim order passed by the Division Bench has been stayed and the said SLP is still pending.

5. Taking note of the above, issue notice to the respondents, returnable within four weeks, both by ordinary process as well as registered post.

6. Notice be also given 'dasti' to learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. List the matter on 18.05.2026.

8. In the meanwhile and till further orders, the effect and operation of the order dated 06.04.2026 (Annexure-1) shall remain stayed and the respondents are directed to allow the petitioner to continue on the post of Administrator, Gram Panchayat Kankariya, Panchayat Samiti Lalsot, District Dausa.