KAMLABEN ROHITBHAI PATEL Vs. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein claims to be an elected Sarpanch of Hazira Gram Panchayat, Taluka Choryasi, District Surat. She claims to have been elected in 1995. While she was working as Sarpanch, a show cause notice dated 14th July 1998 was served upon her for her removal under Section 57(1) by the District Development Officer, Surat. A copy of this show cause notice has been placed on record as Annexure.C. The petitioner filed a reply to the said show cause notice vide Annexure.D dated 28th September 1998. The District Development Officer, District Panchayat, Surat, then passed the order dated 2nd November 1998 removing her from the office of the Sarpanch under Section 57(1) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993, which will be hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Against this order dated 2nd November 1998 passed by the District Development Officer, Surat, the petitioner approached the State of Gujarat, in appeal under Section 57(3) of the Act. The State Government by its order dated 4th January 1999 upheld the order passed by the District Development Officer and rejected the petitioner's appeal. Aggrieved from the order dated 2nd November 1998 passed by the District Development Officer, Surat and the order dated 4th January 1999 passed by the State of Gujarat, the present petition was filed by the petitioner before this Court on 12th January 1999. On 13th January 1999, notice returnable on 25th January 1999 was issued. In presence of the Counsel for respondent no.3, on 3rd February 1999, the petition was admitted and the case was directed to be listed for final hearing on 19th February 1999. No reply has been filed by any of the three respondents.

(2.) The petitioner was sought to be removed for seven allegations. The gist of these seven allegations and the gist of the reply thereto as given by the petitioner in the reply to the show cause notice are as under:

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned orders passed by the District Development Officer and the State Government on the following grounds: