M.R.Shah, J. - (1.) Rule. Shri P.R.Abichandani, the learned AGP waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 3. Shri Dhaval C. Dave, the learned advocate waives service of rule for respondent No.5. With the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, the matter was heard finally and the matter is CAV for prouncement of judgment. .RS 2.
(2.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a short but an interesting question of law has arisen to the effect that "At the time of consideration of No Confidence Motion against the Sarpanch as envisaged under Section 56 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993 [ hereinafter referred to as "the Act" ] and for consideration of strength of two-third, whether a vote of the Sarpanch is required to be counted or not ?"
(3.) Though against the impugned decision of the Taluka Development Officer dated 5.1.2005, the petitioners had preferred an appeal before the Appellate Committee of the District Panchayat, Valsad, however in view of the question of law which has arisen in the present special civil application, the learned advocates appearing for the parties requested to decide and dispose of the present special civil application on merits and to consider the legality and validity of the decision of the Taluka Development Officer, Umbergaon dated 5.1.2005 on merits and that is how, the present special civil application is being disposed of on merits considering the legality and validity of the decision of the Taluka Development Officer, Umbergaon dated 5.1.2005.;