1 2025:CGHC:2989 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6212 of 2024 1 Smt. Ramin Bai Netam W/o Shri Balram Singh Netam Aged About 50 Years Present Srapanch Garm Panchayat Kotami, R/o Village - Kotami, Block Akaltara, P.S. And Tahsil Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 Collector Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 3 Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.) - Cum - Prescribed Authority Janjgir, (Tah. Akaltara And Baloda), District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 4 Gram Panchayat, Kotami Through Its Secretary, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 5 Smt. Sunita Ratre W/o Narmada Ratre Aged About 45 Years Up - Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Kotami, Block - Akaltara, P.S. And Tah. Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) / State : Shri Satish Gupta, G.A. For Respondent No. 5 : Shri Rohit Sharma, Advocate along with Shri B.S. 2 Rajput and Ms. Swati Raj Gupta, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 17/01/2025 Heard. 1. By the present writ petition the petitioner is questioning the order of suspension dated 03.12.2024 passed by the SDO (Revenue), Janjgir (respondent No. 3). The petitioner has been suspended from the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Kotami Sonar by exercising the power under Section 39 1 (b) (2) and Section 40 of the C.G. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 ( for short ‘Ahiniyam, 1993’) after issuance of show cause notice and charge sheet. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some documents which are necessary has not been supplied to the petitioner, hence the suspension order is bad in law. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the show cause notice and the charge sheet along with the enquiry report has been supplied to the petitioner and proceedings under Section 40 of the Adhiniyam, 1993 has been drawn and the said proceedings will be concluded in accordance with the provisions of the Adhiniyam, 1993 and the documents which are sought for by the petitioner will be provided to him. Learned State counsel further, on instructions, submits that though in the order sheet it has been mentioned the proceedings under Section 40 has been closed, but it is submitted that the same has wrongly been mentioned and the proceeding under Section 40 of the Adhiniyam, 1993 is going on and the same will be concluded by giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as per law. 3 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned State counsel, it is directed that the petitioner may participate in the proceedings under Section 40 of the Adhiniyam, 1993 and the same be concluded by the SDO (Revenue) by providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as prescribed under the Adhiniyam, 1993. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti