Sharda Bai vs Manoj Panthi And Others

This review petition has been filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with section 151, CPC seeking review of the order dated 26/7/18 passed in R.P. No.917/18, as well as, order dated 16/5/18 passed in W.P. No. 11092/18.

In W.P. No. 11092/18, petitioner had challenged the validity of order dated 1/5/18 passed in Case No. 03/A-89/17-18 by respondent no.3-Sub Divisional Officer, Ganj Basoda, District Vidisha exercising powers under section 21(1) of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993, by virtue of which, petitioner who was working as Sarpanch would have ceased to hold his office as Sarpanch. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy by filing dispute before Collector concerned along with application for stay. The Collector was directed to decide the application for stay within a period of ten days thereafter and till then the effect and operation of order dated 1/5/18 was directed to be kept in abeyance.

Respondent No.1/writ petitioner Manoj Panthi preferred R.P. No. 917/18 o the ground that he could not submit dispute along with application for stay within the period of seven days, as he was severely suffering from Jaundice and was advised complete bed rest and was not in a position to work. Since the period of seven days had expired, the petitioner approached this Court seeking extension of time. This Court vide order dated 26/7/18 extended the time for complying with the order dated 16/5/18 passed in W.P. No. 11092/18, to the effect that petitioner could approach the Collector concerned along with application for stay within seven days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed in R.P. No.917/18.

Learned counsel for the petitioner herein contends that no-confidence motion was challenged in the said writ petition by respondent no.1, suppressing the fact that this Court in W.P.No. 9399/18 vide order dated 11/5/18 had dismissed the petition as withdrawn with liberty to raise the dispute before the Collector, Vidisha within seven days, who in turn, was directed to decide the same on merits rather than throwing it overboard on the ground of limitation. Thereafter, respondent no.1 again filed W.P. No11092/18 which was disposed of without issuing notice to the present petitioner. As such, the order sought to be reviewed was obtained by suppressing the aforesaid fact. Again he suppressed this fact in Review Petition No. 917/18. In the light of the order dated 1/5/18, respondent no.1 was removed from the Office of Sarpanch and the present petitioner was appointed as officiating Sarpanch. Learned counsel contends that the present petitioner is the affected party and the order in the writ petition has been passed without hearing him, which has caused prejudice to him. In such circumstances, it is submitted that the orders dated 26/7/18 and 16/5/18 need to be recalled and the writ petition deserves to be heard afresh.

The factum of suppression, as stated above, is not disputed by learned Government Advocate.

In view of the aforesaid, this review petition is allowed. The orders dated 26/7/18 and 16/5/18 (Supra) are hereby recalled. W.P. No. 11092/2018 is restored to its original number. Office is directed to list the same on the question of admission and interim relief.