DAVA GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. PANDESWAR SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this petition has challenged the order dated 3.8.1999 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal. Cuttack Bench as contained at Annexure -8 on a motion made before it by opposite party No. 1, who was Secretary of Dava Gram Panchayat. The order was passed by the Tribunal even without notice to the Grama Panchayat. By that order the Tribunal directed the District Magistrate and Collector, Bargarh to see that his instructions by letter dated 21.8.1998 are carried out within a fortnight of receipt of a copy of that order. The District Magistrate and Collector in his turn issued a letter on 27.8.1999 as contained at Annexure -9 to the Grama Panchayat intimating it of the direction of the Tribunal.

(2.) THE Grama Panchayat kept opposite party No. 1 under suspension on the allegation that there were grave charges against him, and in dereliction of his duty as Secretary of the Grama ' Panchayat, he acted in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Grama Sasan. The Grama Panchayat also found that the Secretary has been prosecuted under the Essential Commodities Act and placed him under suspension in exercise of power under Rule 216 of the Grama Panchayat Rules. The Collector had issued the direction on 21.8.1998 (Annexure -C/3) bringing to the notice of the Grama Panchayat, Rule 216 of the Grama Panchayat Rules and requesting the Panchayat to take immediate steps to reinstate the Secretary -opposite party No. 1 who was under suspension for more than two years and four months. Thereupon the Grama Panchayat took Annexure -6 Resolution requesting the Collector to re -consider his decision contained in the letter dated 21.8.1998.

(3.) WE find that a Full Bench of this Court in Sri Adwait Chandra Jena v. Khandahata Grama Panchayat and Ors. : 1998 (II) OLR 410, has held that the Secretary of a Grama Panchayat does not hold a civil post under the State Government and he is not a Government servant. This would mean that the Secretary could not have approached the Administrative Tribunal in the circumstances of the case. Thus, it is clear that the Tribunal acted without jurisdiction in entertaining the application made by opposite party No. 1 and in proceeding to pass Annexure -8 order. The said order is to be quashed, as it is passed by the Tribunal without jurisdiction and is even otherwise illegal since it is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Annexure -8 will thus stand quashed. Annexure -9 is a letter consequent to Annexure -8. The same will also stand quashed.