JINNATUN KHATUN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned order under Memo dated 14th July, 2015 passed by the Prescribed Authority & BDO, Hemtabad Development Block, Hemtabad, Uttar Dinajpur whereby the order issued by the said Prescribed Authority & BDO speaks as follows :- That in conformity with the statutory provision as laid down in subsection (4) of section (9) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act as amended up to date, Upa-Pradhan of Bishnupur G.P. Sri Saki Mohammad shall exercise the powers, perform functions and discharge the duties of the Pradhan until further order.

(2.) Mr. Piyush Chaturvedi, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order dated 14th July, 2015 was actually given effect to on 17th Aug., 2015 as the appeal preferred by the private respondents was disposed of on 10th Aug., 2015 by holding, inter alia as follows :- We have considered the fact and circumstances of the case. On e the decision to remove the Pradhan became effective the original cause of action of the writ petitioners ceased to exist on the basis of the original writ petition. The petitioners were not in a position to get any relief because the order for removal had already been passed. So long as that order is not set aside, the order passed on 2nd Jan., 2015 cannot also be made operative once again. Therefore, the order under challenge is patently bad and is set aside. In the said order, Their Lordships were pleased to grant leave to the petitioners only to the effect that this will not, however, preclude the writ petitioners from challenging the order of removal if they are entitled in accordance with law. With this liberty, the petitioner immediately thereafter, filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned order under Memo dated 14th July, 2015 which was actually given effect to from 17th Aug., 2015.

(3.) Mr. Chaturvedi further submitted that this impugned order is bad in law since it has not been issued within the period as prescribed under sub-section (10) of Sec. 12 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. Sub-Section (10) of Sec. 12 of the said Act is set out hereunder : S.12. ******* (10) On receipt of the minutes of the meeting and the report under sub-section (9), the prescribed authority shall, within next five working days, take such action, as he may deem fit and the entire process commencing from submission of motion to the prescribed authority up to the action finally taken by him shall be completed within thirty days It is however, submitted by Mr. Chaturvedi that as per sub-section (10) of Sec. 12 of the said Act, the entire process would be completed within thirty days. Mr. Chaturvedi further contended that the entire process under sub-section (10) of Sec. 12 postulates from removal of the Pradhan upto appointment of the new Pradhan in place and stead of the earlier Pradhan. Mr. Chaturvedi further drew my attention to subsection (11) of Sec. 12 of the said Act where it prescribes as follows : S.12.*********** (11) If the motion is not carried by the majority of its existing members or the meeting cannot be held for want of quorum, not notice of any subsequent motion for the removal of the same office bearers shall be taken into cognizance within a period of one year from the date appointed for such meeting