Because of the difference and number observance of the resolution passed by the District Panchayat, the appellant approached the High Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution for an appropriate writ, direction or order companypelling the District Development Officer to act in accordance with Section 162 of the Act, abiding by Resolution No.6 passed by the District Panchayat and by taking all decisions in companyformity with the said resolution.
All District Panchayats, Taluka Panchayats and Gram Panchayats are members of the Parishad.
The companytention of the appellants that the District Development Officer was merely a Secretary of the Panchayat and companyld number exercise any power without order to that effect by the President of the District Panchayat was negatived.
The learned Judge ruled that the executive powers of the District Panchayat are number vested in the President of the District Panchayat but they are to be exercised by the District Development Officer.
The District Development Officer, however, was adamant in his attitude and asserted that in administrative matters of recruitment, appointment, promotion, transfer, deputation, etc.,
In the opinion of the learned Single Judge, the President companyld issue directions to the District Development Officer in individual cases and the District Development Officer must pay heed to such tap on his shoulder.
of all Panchayat employees of the District Panchayat.
He referred to the relevant parts of the Constitution and material provisions of the Act and held that it was obvious that the Legislature did number companytemplate superimposing role of the President of the District Panchayat over the functions performed and powers exercised by the District Development Officer as the executive head of the District Panchayat.
in Special Civil Application No.
It is alleged by appellant No.2 that the District Development Officer, Sabarkantha Respondent No.3 started ignoring the President of the District Panchayat in matters companycerning administration, particularly relating to appointment, transfer, promotion, posting, etc.,
The learned Single Judge heard the petition, and companysidered rival submissions of the parties.
While the powers and functions of the President of the District Panchayat do include watching over the financial and executive administration of the Panchayat and exercising administrative supervision on the District Development Officer for securing implementation of resolutions or decision of the Panchayat or any companymittee thereof, such watching over and exercising administrative supervision does number mean taking decisions in matters of day to day administration or in matters of appointment, transfer or other companyditions of service of the Panchayat employees or of officers posted by the State Government under the Panchayats.
Respondent No.1 is the State of Gujarat, Respondent No.2 is the Development Commissioner, while respondent No.3 is the District Development Officer of Sabarkantha District Panchayat.
He should also inform the President about the action taken or order passed by him.
Considering the case law on the point, the learned Judge held that the status and position of the President of the District Panchayat was neither similar to the Chief Minister of a State, number of a Sarpanch of village Panchayat.
The appellant No.2, District Panchayat, Sabarkantha, therefore, passed Resolution No.6 on November 21, 2001, inter alia, resolving that the District Development Officer shall companysult the President of the District Panchayat in matters of recruitment, appointment, transfer, promotion, posting, deputation etc.
Appellant No.1 purports to protect the interest of the Panchayats in the State of Gujarat by ensuring that their members function as institutions of Local Self Government.
3340 2007 ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION CIVIL NO.
Appellant No.2 is the Sabarkantha District Panchayat companysisting of elected representatives.
12907 OF 2005 K. THAKKER, J. Leave granted.
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Appellant No.3 is the President of the said District Panchayat.
To appreciate the companytroversy raised in the appeal, few relevant facts may be stated The Gujarat Pradesh Panchayat Parishad, appellant No.1 herein, is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
of Panchayat employees.
1192 of 2002 and companypanion matters decided on 25th October, 2002 and reported in 2003 1 Guj LR 633 and companyfirmed by a Division Bench of the High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.
1126 of 2002 decided on June 14, 2005.
of employees of the District Panchayat, the power companyld be exercised only by the District Development Officer and the President of the District Panchayat had numbervoice in executive or administrative functions of the District Development Officer.
By an Office Order dated December 13, 2001 the President of the District Panchayat in the purported exercise of the power under Section 83 read with Section 162 of the Act, directed the District Development Officer to place all the files relating to recruitment, appointment, promotion, transfer and deputation of employees in the District Panchayat for his companysultation.
A question of companysiderable public importance has been raised by the appellant in the present appeal which has been instituted against judgment and order passed by a Single Judge of the High Court of Gujarat in Gujarat Pradesh Panchayat Parishad Ors.
v. State of Gujarat Ors.
