Naresh Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others

Sandeep Sharma, J

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 24.2.2010 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-5), whereby appeal having been filed by respondent No.6 against appointment of the petitioner as Panchayat Sahayak by Gram Panchayat Banag Dhinni, came to be allowed, petitioner has approached this court in the instant proceedings filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to set aside order dated 24.2.2010.

Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Devender K. Sharma ,learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the Sub Divisional Magistrate,Pachhad, while deciding the appeal having been filed by respondent No.6 failed to afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as a result of which, great prejudice has been caused to him

Having perused order dated 24.2.2010, impugned in the instant proceedings, there appears to be merit in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. Sub Divisional Magistrate Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh, though issued notice to Block Development Officer Pachhad to clarify his position but at no point of time, issued notice to the petitioner, as a result of which, appeal having been filed by respondent No.6 came to be decided in his absence. Since no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, while deciding appeal of the respondent No.6, serious prejudice has been caused to the petitioner on account of violation of principles of natural justice. Needless to say, opportunity of hearing is the right of a party, especially the one, which is going to be adversely affected, and violation thereof vitiates the entire proceedings. Had the authority concerned issued notice to the petitioner before deciding the appeal having been filed by respondent No.6, he would have got an opportunity to appear before said authority and present his case, which in the case at hand is totally missing.

Consequently in view of above, I find merit in the present petition, which is accordingly allowed. Annexure P-5, order dated 24. 2.2010 passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh in case Shamsher Singh v. Block Development Officer and others, is quashed and set aside and matter is remanded back to said authority, with a direction to decide the appeal afresh, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after taking into consideration Rules, which were in vogue at the time of selection, expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today. Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.6, undertake to cause presence of their clients before authority below on 1.9.2023, enabling it to decide the appeal, within the time stipulated in this order.

The petition stands disposed of alongwith all pending applications. Interim directions, if any, stand disposed of.