Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Gopal Lal Sharma And Ors vs State (Panchayat Raj Dep)Ors on 14 October, 2011
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. *** S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7888/2011. Gopal Lal Sharma & ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan & ors. DATE OF ORDER : 14/10/2011 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI *** Mr. Neeraj Sharma, for petitioners.
Instant writ petition has been filed assailing the notification issued by the Government dt. 25/07/1998 (Anx.1) in exercise of powers conferred u/Sec.9(3) of the Rajasthan Panchayat Raj Act,1994 pursuant to which the nomenclature of Gram Panchayat Bichpadi was changed to Nagal Bichpadi. Pursuant to the statutory notification issued by the Government dt. 25/07/1998 (Anx.1), order has been passed from the office of Gram Panchayat dt. 04/04/2011 (Anx.10) that henceforth name of Gram Panchayat may be read as Nagal Bichpadi for all practical purposes. The writ petition has been filed at the behest of some local residents of the area.
Counsel submits that from the very initial constitution of the Gram Panchayat, it was known as Bichpadi and there appears to be no justification to change name of the Gram Panchayat by the State Government under statutory notification and even after the Gazette notification was issued, throughout it was continued with the name of Gram Panchayat, Bichpadi and change pursuant thereto was never given effect to. The impugned decision, which has now been taken by the respondents dt. 04/04/2011 in carrying out the Gazette notification is wholly arbitrary and deserves to be quashed.
The submission made is wholly bereft of merit for the reason that the State Government in exercise of statutory powers issued notification changing nomenclature of Gram Panchayat, Bichpadi to Nagal Bichpadi and this Court does not find any error in the decision making process adopted by the respondents and it is not case of the petitioners that while issuing the impugned notification, the statutory requirements under the Act of 1994 have not been complied with. The petitioners, who are local residents of the Gram Panchayat concerned, have failed to justify as to how they are affected by the later decision dt. 04/04/2011 which is nothing but a communication in compliance of the statutory notification and that will not give any fresh cause of action to the petitioners.
Counsel further submits that the petitioners may be permitted to make representation to the State authorities pointing out their grievance. Once the statutory notification has been issued in exercise of the powers under the Act, 1994, making representation in view of the Gazette notification will be of no consequence.
The writ petition is wholly without merit and is accordingly dismissed.
[AJAY RASTOGI], J.
Raghu/p.3/7888-CW-2011-Final.doc