Vikas Kumar s/o Naresh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan
2017-11-01
ALOK SHARMA
body2017
DigiLaw.ai
ORDER : ALOK SHARMA, J. 1. The matter has been heard at length. The submission of Mr. K.K Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms. Naina Saraf counsel for the respondent-Sarpanch is that at the foundation of this writ of quo-warranto are two impugned orders dated 15.06.2015 and 25.04.2017 both of which are under challenge before this court in different S.B Civil Writ Petitions. He submits that in the event of these petitions being decided to the detriment of the respondent, and subsequently the aforesaid two impugned orders dated 15.06.2015 and 25.04.2017 being set aside, it would create a situation of palpable unjustness. 2. Mr. J.R Tantia appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent had over a year to obtain relief against the impugned order dated 15.06.2015 and over six months for relief against the impugned order dated 25.04.2017 That they could not. The mere pendency of the petitions challenging the aforesaid orders dated 15.06.2015 and 25.04.2017 relating to the respondent-Sarpanch being found not belong to a Schedules Tribe in two enquiries including one by the Collector under the order of this Court and in another by a duly constituted multi-member committee cannot have the effect of negating their conclusions. The respondent is resultantly never was a member of the Scheduled Tribes and thus cannot continue for a moment as the Sarpanch, elected on a post reserved for Scheduled Tribes. This petition for a writ of quowarranto filed against him as usurper of public office has to be resultantly heard and decided early. 3. Having heard the respective contention of the counsel for the parties, on balance, I am of the considered view that in the interest of justice it would be appropriate to postpone the hearing in this petition for a period of one week such that whatever relief may be available to the respondent against the two aforesaid orders dated 15.06.2015 and 25.04.2017 may be obtained by him if the Court is so satisfied. 4. This petition will be finally heard on the next date as mere pendency of challenge to the orders dated 15.06.2015 and 25.04.2017 cannot by itself entail any benefit to the respondent-Sarpanch. 5. Put up on November 8, 2017 at 02.00 PM, as prayed.