1 CGHC010345372026 2026:CGHC:40161 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4659 of 2026 Dinesh Markam S/o Kosa Markam Aged About 29 Years R/o Village And Post Bade Lakhapal, Janpad Panchayat And Tehsil Katekalyan District- South Baster Dantewada (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, (C.G.) 2 - Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department Raipur, (C.G.) 3 - The Collector, South Baster Dantewada, (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, District- South Baster Dantewada, (C.G.) 5 - The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, District- South Baster Dantewada, (C.G.) 6 - The Tehsildar, Katekalyan District- South Baster Dantewada (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 15.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. Love Kumar Ramteke, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shobhit Mishra, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for respondents/State. 2. The petitioner has filed this present petition praying for following relief:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records from the respondents. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the issue an appropriate writ, order or direction and quash/set aside the impugned order dated 09/07/2026, whereby the petitioner has been removed from the elected office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Bade Lakhapal, Janpad Panchayat Katekalyan, District South Bastar Dantewada. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to restore the petitioner to the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Bade Lakhapal with all consequential benefits. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief or pass such 3 other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case in the interest of justice.” 3. Facts of the case, as projected, are that the petitioner is an elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Bade Lakhapal, Janpad Panchayat Katekalyan, District South Bastar Dantewada, and was discharging his duties as such at the relevant time. The dispute initially arose in connection with the weekly market at Katekalyan, wherein certain traders from Geedam were allegedly prevented from establishing their shops. A show-cause notice dated 27.05.2026 was issued to the petitioner alleging his involvement in the said incident. The petitioner submitted his reply on 04.06.2026, denying the allegations and stating that he had intervened in his capacity as the elected Sarpanch in the interest of the villagers. Subsequently, grievances were also raised by the villagers and parents regarding shifting of the Kasturba Gandhi Balika Residential School from Gram Lakhapal to Katekalyan and the difficulties faced by the girl students. The petitioner took up the said grievances before the authorities and submitted a further representation dated 05.07.2026. Despite the submissions made by the petitioner, the competent authority passed the impugned order dated 09.07.2026 under Section 40 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, removing him from the office of Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Bade Lakhapal. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 91 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 before the 4 competent appellate authority on 20.07.2026. The present petition has been filed questioning the legality of the impugned order and seeking appropriate relief in accordance with law. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that against the order passed under Section 40 of the C.G. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the concerned Collector, which is pending consideration. 5. Learned State counsel submits that the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending consideration before the concerned Collector and, therefore, the petitioner may approach the said authority for redressal of his grievance. 6. In view of the aforesaid submission and considering the limited grievance raised by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served by directing the concerned authority to consider and decide the pending appeal expeditiously. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Collector to consider and decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, strictly in accordance with law. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Akhil