Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 178 (CHH)

PRATIMA RATRE v. STATE OF C. G.

2014-04-26

MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA

body2014
ORAL ORDER Heard. 1. The order of removal passed by Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Link Court Gunderdehi, District -Baled on 13/03/2013 affirmed in appeal by the Collector, Balod dated 30/04/2013 has been challenged by the petitioner relying upon order passed by this Court on 02/07/2013 in the case of Durga Prasad Sinha Vs. Shailesh Kumar Sahu & others in WP (C) No. 1998/2012, on the submission that the Gram Panchayat of the petitioner falls within the jurisdiction of Tahsil-Gunderdehi. Therefore, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Balod could not have passed the order as it had no territorial jurisdiction. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the case of Durga Prasad (supra) this issue has been considered by this Court taking into consideration the stand taken by State based on the order dated 01/01/2012 of the Collector and it has been held that the proceedings could be drawn only by Sub-Divisional Officer, Gunderdehi and not Sub-Divisional Officer, Balod. Therefore, it is submitted that in view of the aforesaid, impugned order passed in the case of the petitioner is without jurisdiction. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the impugned order of removal has been passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Link Court Gunderdehi, District-Balod, on the basis of a show cause notice issued by Sub-Divisional Officer, Balod. According to State counsel, the order has been passed by Sub-Divisional Officer of Gunderdehi only therefore, there is no illegality in the order. 4. The show cause notice was issued to the petitioner firstly on 19/10/2011 by Sub-Divisional Officer, Patan, Head Office Durg. However, later on, a fresh show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 06/11/2012 by Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Balod. 5. It is, therefore, apparent that the authority who had issued show cause notice on 06/1/2012 i.e. Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Balod had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 40 of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam against the petitioner. On the basis of the show cause notice issued to the petitioner, order has been passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Link Court Gunderdehi, District-Balod. 6. In the ease of Durga Prasad (supra), this Court after taking into consideration the order dated 01/01/2012 passed by the Collector has come to the conclusion that Sub-Divisional Officer Balod had no power to hold proceedings of removal of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Haldi which falls within the jurisdiction of Sub-Divisional Officer Gunderdehi. 6. In the ease of Durga Prasad (supra), this Court after taking into consideration the order dated 01/01/2012 passed by the Collector has come to the conclusion that Sub-Divisional Officer Balod had no power to hold proceedings of removal of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Haldi which falls within the jurisdiction of Sub-Divisional Officer Gunderdehi. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Tavera which also falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Gunderdehi Tehsil. This would mean that at the time when the show cause notice was issued, the jurisdiction rested only with Sub-Divisional Officer of Gunderdehi and not that of Balod Sub Division. 7. It is, therefore, clear that the show cause nonce was issued to the petitioner by the Sub-Divisional Officer who had no territorial jurisdiction to remove the petitioner from the office of Sarpanch. Therefore, even though subsequently, the final order has been passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer at Gunderdehi, the proceedings are rendered illegal because the show cause notice was issued by incompetent authority. 8. Therefore, I am inclined to interfere with the impugned order on the ground of jurisdictional defect. The impugned order of removal passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, on 13/03/2013 and affirmed by the Collector on 30/04/2013 are declared illegal and set aside. However it would be open for the jurisdictional Sub-Divisional Officer, Gunderdehi to initiate fresh proceedings for removal of the petitioner. The petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. Petition Allowed.