BIDYADHAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is an elected Sarpanch of Kalopala Gram Panchayat under Junagarh Panchayat Samiti in the district of Kalahandi, has impugned the order dated 25.04.2014 passed by the Collector, Kalahandi in a proceeding under Section 26 (2) of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, 1964 ("Act" for short), on the ground that opportunity of being heard was not afforded to him.

(2.) One Satyanarayan Behera of Kalopala Gram Panchayat filed an allegation petition to the effect that the petitioner is blessed with more than two children and therefore he is disqualified under Section 25 (1)(v) of the Act to continue as Sarpanch. The Collector, Kalahandi obtained report from the District Panchayat Officer, Kalahandi and the B.D.O., Junagarh regarding the veracity of the allegation. Both the District Panchayat Officer, Kalahandi and the B.D.O., Junagarh submitted their report along with the information supplied under R.T.I. Act by the Headmaster in-charge of the Government U.G. High School, Kalopala, and the information under R.T.I. Act supplied by the Medical Officer-incharge, C.H.C., Junagarh. From the said report, the Collector was satisfied that the petitioner is blessed with four children after the cut-off date. He therefore initiated a suo motu proceeding against the petitioner vide G.P. Case No.4 of 2013 and issued notice to the petitioner to appear in person or through authorized representative, to answer the allegation.

(3.) The proceeding was initiated on 07.06.2013. The petitioner on 31.08.2013 entered appearance through advocate Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra. The case was adjourned on the basis of time sought for by the petitioner on 21.09.2013. After two adjournments, due to various other reasons the learned counsel for the petitioner on 06.12.2013 filed a petition to supply the petitioner a copy of the allegation petition to enable the petitioner to file his show-cause. Accordingly order was passed on the same date to supply a copy of the allegation petition to the petitioner through his counsel. Thereafter the case was adjourned on two dates, as the Presiding Officer was absent. On 27.12.2013 learned counsel for the petitioner sought for an adjournment. The case was adjourned, directing the learned counsel for the petitioner to file his show-cause by the next date, as in the meantime this Court in W.P. (C) No.22267 of 2013 (Satyanarayan Behera A. Collector, Kalahandi) had issued a direction targeting the G.P. Case to be disposed of within three months from the date of receipt of the order. The case was adjourned to 10.01.2014. On 10.01.2014 learned counsel for the petitioner again sought for adjournment and finally on 17.01.2014 the petitioner filed his show-cause reply denying the allegation. The case suffered adjournments on 24.01.2014, 07.02.2014, 14.02.2014 and 21.02.2014, as the P.O. was otherwise busy. On 28.02.2014, Sujata Barik (present opposite party no.2), who is the Naib-Sarpanch of Kalopala Gram Panchayat, filed a petition through advocate to implead her as opposite party to the case. On the said date the parties were directed to submit their arguments by the next date, as the case had already been targeted by this Court. On 07.03.2014, 14.03.2014 and 28.03.2014 the case suffered adjournments, as the P.O. was otherwise busy in election duty. On 25.04.2014 arguments by the parties were heard and the case was disposed of by passing the impugned order.