Dismissed

Jaravi Devi v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 Dec 2019SAW/1654/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Divisional Commissioner, Jodhpur affirmed that Ex-Sarpanch Jaravi Devi was guilty of misconduct and debarred her from elections for five years. The High Court found that an inquiry was conducted with an opportunity of hearing and upheld the order dismissing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed and the impugned order of the Divisional Commissioner affirming guilt and five-year debarment stands upheld.

Jaravi Devi Vs State of Rajasthan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1654/2018

¶3

Jaravi Devi W/o Shri Kheta Ram, Aged About 75 Years, Ex-Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Janapur, Tehsil Pindwara District Sirohi

¶4

Dana Ram Solanki, Aged About 55 Years, At Present Land Revenue Inspector, Tehsil Pindwara District Sirohi

¶5

Smt. Santosh Kalbi, Aged About 35 Years, At Present Gram Vikas Adhikari, Gram Panchayat Panchdeval, Tehsil Pindwara, District Sirohi

¶6

----Appellants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan, through Secretary, Department of Rural Development & Panchayati Raj, Govt. of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶9

The Divisional Commissioner, Jodhpur Division, Jodhpur

¶10

The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sirohi

¶11

The Addl. District Collector, Sirohi

¶12

The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Pindwara, District Sirohi

¶13

----Respondents

¶14

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jawan Singh Rao. For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Bissa.

¶15

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. INDRAJIT MAHANTY HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI Order

¶16

11/12/2019

¶17

Appellants have filed the present appeal seeking challenge to the impugned order, whereby the order dated 08.06.2018 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jodhpur has been affirmed holding petitioner No.1 (appellant No.1 herein), being ExSarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Janapur guilty for committing misconduct between the year 2010 to 2015. As a result,

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[SAW-1654/2018]

¶20

petitioner No.1 was debarred from contesting panchayat elections for a period of five years.

¶21

Mr. Jawan Singh, learned counsel for the appellants submits that proper inquiry was not conducted and opportunity of hearing was not granted to petitioner No.1 before passing the impugned order against her, which has taken away her rights to contest elections for a period of five years. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the inquiry before the Divisional Commissioner was ex-parte in spite of her having complete defence to the allegations made.

¶22

Mr. K.K. Bissa, learned counsel for the respondents submits that two notices dated 23.02.2018 and 15.05.2018 were given by the Divisional Commissioner and both the notices were served on the appellants. It is also submitted by learned counsel that inspite of service of notices, the appellant No.1 chose not to appear and thus the learned authority was justified in passing the impugned orders while invoking Sections 38 and 39 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1996 debarring appellant No.1 to contest election for a period of five years.

¶23

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that a detailed enquiry report was on record and a well reasoned order was passed by the Divisional Commissioner by providing opportunity of hearing to her as reflected in the record. The tainted representative has been given a limited punishment for a period of five years debarring her to contest elections, which is justified in the eyes of the law.

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

[SAW-1654/2018]

¶26

With the aforesaid observations, no interference in the impugned order is called for. Hence the appeal is dismissed.

¶27

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J (INDRAJIT MAHANTY),CJ

¶28

42-a.asopa/-

Jaravi Devi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaravi Devi v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balwant Singh and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Diwan Singh and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Indian Oil Corp. and Anr. Vs Uma Ram and Ors.

Surendra Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

M/S Anil Engineering through Proprietor Vs C.C.E. Jaipur-Ii and Ors.

M/S Jain Metal Components P Ltd. Vs U.O.I.and Ors.