toto togel 4d situs toto togel situs togel slot deposit pulsa slot gacor 4d data keluaran hk

Vijendra Kumar vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

48.00

Guaranteed Safe Checkout
Spread the knowledge

Rajasthan Panchayati Raj. Rules, 1996–Rule 23–Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994–Sec. 39–Inquiry and removal of the elected member–Notice was affixed on the house of petitioner on 09.12.2020–Statement of charges were not affixed with the notice–Charge-sheet was not served as required under Rule 23–Petitioner submitted the representation on 23.12.2020 and charge-sheet was sent him on 24.12.2020, allowing only seven days time to submit the explanation–Provision speaks for the time of 15 days which would commence from the date of notice–Notice without gist of allegations is not permissible–Order of removal from the post was passed on 01.01.2021–Mandates of Rules 23 were not followed by giving the time of 15 days–Further, the respondents proceeded hastily and hurriedly on the complaint received on 08.12.2020 and passed the order of suspension without there being any ground u/s. 38–Intention of respondents was to keep away the petitioner from the election process of Pradhan and Uppradhan–Fact of delivery of third child could not have been established without the medical examination of the wife of petitioner–Held, impugned order is perverse and contrary to the law–Quashed and set aside.