Smt. Renu Gangwar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 2006 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Smt. Renu Gangwar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 4 September, 2024

                                                            2024:UHC:6356-DB



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                AT NAINITAL
            HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MS. RITU BAHRI
                              AND
              HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL

                       04TH SEPTEMBER, 2024
              SPECIAL APPEAL No. 290 OF 2024

Smt. Renu Gangwar.
                                                                ...Appellant
                                   Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others.
                                                            ...Respondents
Counsel for the appellant.         :   Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, learned counsel.

Counsel for respondent nos. 1 to   :   Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Additional
4.                                     Chief Standing Counsel for the State
                                       of Uttarakhand.

Counsel for the intervener.        :   Mr.   Dushyant     Mainali,   learned
                                       counsel.

JUDGMENT :

(per Ms. Ritu Bahri, C.J.)

The present Special Appeal has been filed

against the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge

in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2052/2023 dated 23.08.2024,

whereby the said Writ Petition has been dismissed.

2. Heard counsel for the parties.

3. Counsel for the appellant has referred to the

decision dated 07.07.2023 passed in Contempt Petition

No. 105/2023. The said Contempt Petition had been filed

against the present appellant and Secretary, Panchayat,

that they had not complied with the judgment dated

20.07.2006 passed in Writ Petition (M/B) No. 353/2004.

2024:UHC:6356-DB

In paragraph nos. 15 & 16 of the judgment passed in

Contempt Petition No. 105/2023, the learned Single

Judge has observed that the judgment dated 20.07.2006

will not be applicable for any future incident. The

respondents were not even a party to that Writ Petition,

where the judgment dated 20.07.2006 was passed. In

paragraph no. 17, the learned Single Judge has observed

that a statement was given on behalf of the State, as well

as on behalf of respondent no. 2, that instructions have

been issued that in future, no relative/ representative of

any Member/ Chairman shall participate in such

meetings.

4. Counsel for the appellant further states that, in

the present case, the incident, where the appellant's

husband participated in a meeting, took place on

08.12.2022. Hence, for all intents and purposes, the

Contempt Petition was rightly dismissed. The instructions

issued by the State are also after 08.12.2022. Hence, all

these facts have not been disputed by the counsel for the

State.

5. Counsel for the intervener has referred to Page

No. 35 - Annexure No. 4 of the Writ Petition, where two

grounds for enquiry have been mentioned. We make it

2024:UHC:6356-DB

clear that the enquiry will proceed against the appellant

only against violation of the Uttar Pradesh Kshettra

Panchayats and Zila Panchayats (Removal of Pramukhs

and Up-Pramukhs, Adhyakshas and Up-Adhyakshas)

Enquiry Rules, 1997, as per the observation made in

Page No. 35 - Annexure No. 4 dated 27.06.2023.

6. The present Special Appeal stands disposed of

with the above-said observations.

7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand

disposed of accordingly.

______________ RITU BAHRI, C.J.

__________________ RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.

Dt: 04th September, 2024 Rahul

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH

2.5.4.20=aa4fa3bee6691397758b14516ed3e66e61bf4c848741 983ed8c39e4145cf1dab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=303B55CC3063D34AC45BF8A192FCAD15C390 A1AAD7B39857D2540AE4C28A4898, cn=RAHUL PRAJAPATI Date: 2024.09.04 15:14:42 +05'30'