Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 96 (MP)

Nirmala Sirsam v. State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

2020-01-16

VISHAL DHAGAT

body2020
JUDGMENT Vishal Dhagat, J. - Petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 03.09.2019, contained in Annexure-P/20, passed by Collector Seoni, District-Seoni (M.P.) and also challenging order dated 06.11.2019, contained in Annexure-P/22 passed by Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur. 2. In short, the case is that a no confidence motion was brought against the Sarpanch of Gram-Bheelwada, Ward No.17, Gram Panchayat-Sillour, Janpad Panchayat-Kurai, District-Seoni, M.P. Mr. Parvesh Markam was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Sillour. He was elected on 22.02.2015 and joined on 01.03.2015. Notice of no confidence was brought on 11.03.2019. Thereafter, special session was convened on 10.06.2019 and no confidence motion was successful. Mr. Parvesh Markam, Sarpanch being aggrieved by the order preferred an appeal before Collector under Section 21(4) of Panchayat (Gram Panchayat Ke Sarpanch tatha Up-sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat tatha Zila Panchayat ke President tatha Vice-President ke Virudh Avishwas Prastav) Niyam, 1994 (for brevity 'the Rules of 1994'). In appeal, respondent No.7 made averment that no confidence motion passed against the Sarpanch was bad in law, as there was non-compliance of Rules 1, 2, 3 and 5(5-a) of Rules of 1994. It was also submitted that no satisfaction was received by the competent authority under Section 21(3) of the Rules before calling special session of no confidence. Rule 4 was also not followed. Notices were not send in prescribed format by designated authority and procedure was also not followed and on said basis motion of no confidence against respondent No.7. was set aside by Collector. 3. Collector vide its order dated 03.09.2019, contained in Annexure-P/20, allowed the appeal and set aside the order. Being aggrieved by the order passed by Collector, present petitioner Nirmala Sirsam filed an appeal before Commissioner under Gram Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, of 1995. Learned Commissioner by its impugned order dated 06.11.2019 dismissed the appeal. 4. Learned Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur dismissed the appeal on the ground that as per provision of rule 24-A(4), the order passed by the Collector will be final and, therefore, the order passed by Collector cannot be challenged in appeal. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied on the judgment passed by this Court reported in Khandilal Patel and others vs. State of M.P. and others,1919 AIR M.P. 137 . 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied on the judgment passed by this Court reported in Khandilal Patel and others vs. State of M.P. and others,1919 AIR M.P. 137 . In this judgment, it has been held by this Court that a revision is maintainable before the Commissioner under Gram Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, of 1995. The order passed under Section 21(4) is the order passed by the Collector which is final in nature. Therefore, appeal will not lie against the said order. There is no bar in the rules to file a revision before Commissioner, as Act does not provide any bar against filing of revision petition, then revision petition against the order of Collector which was otherwise final was competent and revisional authority could certainly exercise its powers, as vested in it. 6. As per the judgment in Khandilal Patel (supra), Commissioner will be competent to entertain a revision against the order of Collector under Section 21(4) of the Rules of 1994. Commissioner has not decided the case of petitioner on merits and has rejected revision only on the ground that same is not maintainable in view of Section 21(4) of Rules of 1994. 7. In view of aforesaid discussion, the order passed by Commissioner contained in Annexure-P/22, dated 06.11.2019 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Commissioner, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur to hear the revision on its merits and passed order afresh after hearing the parties and giving them a proper opportunity of hearing. 8. With the aforesaid direction, writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed off. 9. C.C as per rules.