← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/2993/2017disposed off

Narendra Netam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-11-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2993 of 2017 Narendra Netam S/o Sonsai Netam, Aged About 45 Years, President, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, R/o Village Bunagaon, Tahsil And Distt. Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Social Welfare, Mantralaya, Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh.

3. The Director (Panchayat), Chhattisgarh Office of Directorate (Panchayat), New Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Dev Chand Matlam, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh

5. Laddu Ram Uike, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh

6. Heera Lal Netam, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh

7. Kamla Mandavi, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh

8. Surajbati Kunjam, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh

9. Ravi Ghosh, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 10.Laxmi Poyam, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 11.Sumitra Netam, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 12.Surajbati Pandey, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 13.Parania Patel, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 14.Jayanti Kashyap, Member, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents

For Petitioner :

Mr. Ravindra Agrawal, Advocate.

For Respondents/State :

Mr. Prasoon Bhaduri, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 10/11/17 Heard.

1.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner for a fairly long time, he submits that no confidence motion had been passed against the petitioner on 09.10.2017 therefore, he may be allowed to make reference / raise a dispute before the competent authority against that order under Section 35(4) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993. 2.

The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable and is accordingly allowed.

3.

Be that as it may, the petitioner would be at liberty to make a reference / raise a dispute before the appropriate authority under Section 35(4) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993. If such a reference or dispute is raised before the appropriate authority within seven days from today then, in turn, the said authority shall do well to consider and decide the petitioner's reference / dispute expeditiously in accordance with law. 4.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Certified copy, today.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka