1 CGHC010287832026 2026:CGHC:34380 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3893 of 2026 Smt. Sushila Bai Manjhi W/o Shri Angad Kumar Aged About 44 Years Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhavan Mantralaya Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) And Prescribed Authority Gharghoda District Raigarh (C.G.) 4 - Naib Tahsildar Tamnar Presiding Officer District Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Jila Panchayat Raigarh Through- Its Chief Executive Officer District- Raigarh (C.G.) 6 - Janpad Panchayat Tamnar Through Its Chief Executive Officer, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 7 - Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Through- Its Secretary Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar District- Raigarh (C.G.) 8 - Taramati Rathiya W/o Shri Parmanand Rathiya Aged About 55 Years Panch Ward No.1 Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar District Raigarh (C.G.) 9 - Phulbai Chouhan W/o Shri Karmu Aged About 55 Years Panch Ward No.2, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.08.06 18:17:25 +0530 2 10 - Nankiram Rathiya S/o Shri Amritlal Rathiya Aged About 45 Years Panch Ward No.3,and Upsarpanch Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 11 - Rukmani Rathiya W/o Shri Surendra Rathiya Aged About 35 Years Panch Ward No.4, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 12 - Paras Rautiya S/o Shri Anjor Singh Rautiya Aged About 25 Years Panch Ward No.5, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 13 - Manmohan Rathiya S/o Shri Nilambar Rathiya Aged About 27 Years Panch Ward No.7, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 14 - Shatrudhan Sidar S/o Shri Tulsiram Sidar Aged About 35 Years Panch Ward No.11 Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 15 - Sachi Bhoy W/o Shri Amit Kumar Bhoy Aged About 30 Years Panch Ward No.10, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 16 - Neerabai Yadav W/o Shri Madhusudan Yadav Aged About 55 Years Panch Ward No.8, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 17 - Tapashwani Yadav W/o Shri Harishchand Yadav Aged About 45 Years Panch Ward No.9, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 18 - Jayanti Rathiya W/o Gautam Rathiya Aged About 22 Years Panch Ward No.6, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 19 - Maruti Manjhi W/o Shri Suresh Kumar Manjhi Aged About 36 Years Panch Ward No.12, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Roop Ram Naik, Advocate For State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. G.A. 3 Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 06.08.2026 1 By filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the legality and validity of the resolution dated 10.07.2026 passed by the members of Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri, Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District Raigarh, whereby a no-confidence motion has been carried against the petitioner resulting in her removal from the office of Sarpanch. The petitioner has also challenged the consequential report/proceedings dated 10.07.2026 prepared by the Naib Tahsildar/Presiding Officer. The principal grounds urged in the petition are that the procedure prescribed under the Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Gram Panchayat Ke Sarpanch Tatha Up- Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat Tatha Jila Panchayat Ke President Tatha Vice-President Ke Virudh Avishwas Prastav) Niyam, 1994, particularly Rule 3(3), has been violated; that the Presiding Officer had no authority to postpone the meeting initially fixed on 30.06.2026; that the subsequent proceedings conducted on 10.07.2026 are without jurisdiction and contrary to the statutory provisions; and that the entire process suffers from material procedural irregularities and manipulation of records. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ in the 4 nature of Certiorari or any other suitable writ/order/direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned No-Confidence Motion Resolution dated 10.07.2026 passed by the members of Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri and the subsequent Report/Proceedings dated 10.07.2026 prepared by Respondent No. 4 (Annexure P/1 colly); 10.2) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to restore the Petitioner forthwith to the post of Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bhuikurri, Janpad Panchayat Tamnar, District Raigarh (C.G.), with full statutory powers and rights; 10.3) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire record pertaining to No-confidence Motion from the possession of the respondent No.3 and respondent No.7. 10.4) Any other relief(s), order(s), or direction(s) which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just, and proper in the interest of justice and cost of the petition.” 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned proceedings are wholly arbitrary and contrary to the mandatory provisions of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 and the Rules of 1994. It is contended that the Presiding Officer exceeded the jurisdiction vested in him by postponing the meeting without any authority under the Rules, solely to accommodate the 5 members supporting the no-confidence motion. It is further submitted that the subsequent meeting and the resolution passed therein are vitiated by gross procedural irregularities, including manipulation of records, and therefore deserve to be quashed in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. 3 On the other hand, learned State counsel raises a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition and submits that the petitioner has an efficacious statutory alternative remedy under Section 21(4) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 for challenging the no-confidence motion. It is, therefore, contended that this Court ought not to entertain the writ petition in the first instance and the petitioner should be relegated to avail the statutory remedy available under the law. 4 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5 Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the grievance raised by the petitioner pertains to the validity of a no-confidence motion passed against a Sarpanch, for which a specific statutory remedy is available under Section 21(4) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993. In view of the availability of such efficacious alternative remedy, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at this stage. 6 6 Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy available under Section 21(4) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 before the competent authority. In the event such proceedings are instituted, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties, as expeditiously as possible. 7 It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case or on the correctness of the rival claims advanced by the parties. All questions of fact and law are left open to be urged before the competent authority, which shall consider and decide the matter independently and uninfluenced by any observation contained in this order, strictly in accordance with law. 8 With the aforesaid observations and liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 9 Certified copies of all the annexures filed along with the writ petition shall be returned to learned counsel for the petitioner after retaining photocopies thereof on the record. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh