Hon'ble MAHESHWARI, J.—This order is in disposal of two applications moved in this writ petition, IA No.6889/2009 and IA No.10881/2009.

2. In IA No.6889/2009, the applicant Ashok Kumawat seeks his impleadment in this writ petition as respondent while by the other application, IA No.10881/2009, the petitioner Anil Chitoda seeks specific order of this Court in relation to the interim order passed earlier in this petition that the same having not been specifically vacated, continues to remain in operation.

3. The matter being considered in relation to the said applications only, elaborate discussion on the merits of the case does not appear necessary; and a brief reference to the background facts and relevant aspects would suffice.

4. The petitioner is said to have been elected as Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bhuwana, Panchayat Samiti Badgaon in the month of January 2005. According to the petition averments, the petitioner came to know about an order dated 09.02.2009 (Annex.1) as issued by the Government in its Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 38 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 placing him under suspension essentially on the ground that he had caused loss to the public exchequer. According to the petitioner, he was never served with any notice either by the Chief Executive Officer of Zila Parishad or by any officer authorised by the State Government before conducting preliminary enquiry in the matter; and no preliminary enquiry had been held against him in terms of Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996. Thus, the petitioner contends that the order dated 09.02.2009 placing him under suspension remains arbitrary and illegal.

5. A reply to the show cause notice issued in this petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents contending, inter alia, that the petitioner is not entitled to challenge the suspension order by way of the writ petition and should put his case before the competent authority; that the order dated 09.02.2009 has been passed after adopting due process of law inasmuch as a detailed enquiry was conducted wherein the petitioner and the Secretary of Gram Panchayat were found guilty. A copy of the enquiry report has been placed on record as Annexure R/1. It is submitted that on 09.02.2009, the Government had issued a charge-sheet to the petitioner directing him to file his defence by 27.02.2009; and the charge-sheet was served upon the petitioner on 24.02.2009. It has been alleged in the reply that the petitioner was involved in issuance of illegal pattas causing heavy loss to the Government. As commented at the outset, merits of the case are not being finally considered in this order and, therefore, other submissions in the petition and the reply need not be dilated upon.

6. Relevant for the purpose of this order are the proceedings in this writ petition. This petition, as filed on 13.02.2009, came up for consideration before the Court for the first time on 17.02.2009 when show cause notices were ordered to be issued, returnable on 25.02.2009.

7. On 25.02.2009, while the matter was placed before the Court with the office report that the notices were awaited, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that service was complete. The Court directed the office to check and to list the matter on 02.03.2009.

8. On 02.03.2009, the Court found that despite service, nobody was present on behalf of the respondents; considered the submission on behalf of the petitioner that the order of suspension had been passed without conducing any enquiry as provided under Rule 22; and, while adjourning the matter to 16.03.2009, ordered that in the meanwhile, effect and operation of the questioned order dated 09.02.2009 (Annex.1) shall remain stayed.

9. On 16.03.2009, the matter was ordered to be listed on 20.03.2009 at the prayer of the counsel for the petitioner with nobody appearing for the respondents; and in relation to the interim order, the Court sai