Disposed
Kamal Mani Patel v. The State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.
Chhattisgarh HCWPS/3179/2014
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (6.6.)…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (6.6.)…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
i‘r
bC;
(I)
IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR
(6.6.)
single agm‘h
%) 9i? OF 2014
WRIT PETITION ( s ) No.
PETITIONER:
Kama! Mani PaTel S/o. Shyamlal PaTeI, aged abouT 34 Years, R/o. VillageGhenspali, PosT- Nawagar‘h, - Gram PanchayaT Kanwar'pali, Janpad PanchayaT Saraypali, Thana- Saraypali Civil & Revenue DisTT.— Mahasamund (C.G.)
RESPONDENT 1.
2,.
The STaTe of Chhaffisgarhfhrough The SecreTary PanchayaT & Rural Developmen‘r Deparfmem‘, Mahanadi Bhawan CapiTal Complex Raipur', DisTT.— Raipur‘ (6.5.) The Director . Panchayaf and Social Welfare DeparTmenT,Raipur, Dish‘: Raipur (C.G.)
The Depu’ry DirecTor, Panchayof and Social Welfare, Mahasamund, DisTT.— Mahasamund (6.6.)
The Chief Execufive officer; Jila PanchayaT Mahasamund, DisTT.Mahasamund ( CG.)
Saheb Ram Patel S/o. Madan Singh PaTel, aged abo'uT 4O Years, r/o. VillageKanwarpali,GramPanchayaT - Kanwarpali, PosT - Navagarh, - Janpad PanchayaT Saraipali, P.5. Saraypali, Civil & Revenue DisTT: Mahasamund (C.G.)
3%! W, 5m, W W.g..c;g2¢ég.:.§..z..7az(égo WW
mm (Wu)
| WWW | www¢s€rm kwm |
|---|---|
| SB : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Mo 11_7.2014 Shri Sunil Sahu, counself 'Shri Shashank Thakur, G Hear n ' Laamggcounsel for the p removed from the post of Panc ..# of writ petition. In that writ petiti respondent No.5. During the p was again appointed as Sec Thereafter, respondent No.5 has abused the process of law. Th before the concerned author appointment as Panchayat Kar set aside by the Cout, respo decision is being taken. Considering the submis petitioner, respondent No.4/C.E the petitioner and pass appropri hearing to respondent No.5, wi receipt of copy of this order. With the aforesaid observ Learned counsel for the d o i |
an Shrivastava, J. rthe petitioner. vt. Advocate for the State. titioner submits that respondent No.5 was ayat Karmi which was challenged by filing , an interim order was passed in favour of ndency of that petition, respondent No.5 tary of Gram Panchayat on 22.2008. withdrawn writ petition on 29.1 .2014. itioner submits that respondent No.5 has petitioner has submitted a representation that as the order of cancellation of i passed earlier on 5.6.2006 has not been dent No.5 should be removed, but, no ions made by learned counsel for the O is directed to consider representation of te orders after affording due opportunity of hin a period of 8 weeks from the date of tions, the petition is finally disposed off. Sd/— Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge h t |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to stay the removal of respondent No. 5 despite the setting aside of an interim order.
Whether the petitioner should be granted leave to file a fresh petition seeking restoration of the cancelled appointment.
Kamani Mani Patel
The State of Chhattisgarh
Saheb Ram Patel
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court