Rajasthan High Court: In a civil writ petition, challenging the suspension order of a democratically elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Baori Kalla solely based on an inspection conducted in 2021, a single-judge bench comprising of Vinit Kumar Mathur, J., found that the suspensions were motivated by political vendetta and lacked proper application of mind. The Court held that democratically elected representatives should not be suspended arbitrarily, as it undermines the democratic process. The Court quashed the suspension order but allowed the respondents to take lawful actions if warranted.
The petitioner, a democratically elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Baori Kalla, in 2020, was subjected to repeated suspensions by the respondents. He was suspended initially in 2022 due to an FIR, which was challenged and temporarily stayed by the court. Subsequently, after reinstatement, the petitioner faced suspension again in 2022, followed by reinstatement based on an enquiry report. However, the petitioner was suspended once more in 2024, vide order dated 05-03-2024, relying solely on an inspection conducted in 2021 without considering subsequent enquiry reports.
The Court observed a pattern of repeated suspensions against the petitioner, indicating political vendetta rather than genuine concerns. The Court noted discrepancies in the respondent’s actions, such as relying solely on an outdated inspection report for the suspension. The Court stressed upon the importance of proper application of mind while passing suspension orders, especially concerning elected representatives.
“Placing under suspension of democratically elected persons on account of political vendetta weakens the very foundation of the democratic set up and, therefore, the respondents are under an obligation to pass the order of suspension after due application of mind.”
The Court quashed the suspension order dated 05-03-2024, finding it to be passed mechanically and without proper application of mind. The Court emphasised that democratically elected representatives should not be suspended arbitrarily, as it undermines democracy. However, the Court allowed the respondents to take lawful actions in accordance with Rule 22 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996.
[Bheru Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine Raj 922, order dated 16-04-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. C. S. Kotwani with Mr. Yash Rajpurohit, Counsel for the Petitioners
Mr. Manish Patel, AAG, Counsel for the Respondents
