NARAHARI MALLICK Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ applications arise oat of the same impugned order (Annexure -9 in O. J. C. No. 1543 of 1985 and Annexure -7 in O. J. C. No. 1544 of 1985) passed by the Collector, Dhenkanal, (opposite party) removing the two petitioners under Section. 26(2) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act, 1964 ('the Act', for short ) as Ward Members of the Nihalprasad Grama Panchayat on the ground that they had incurred disqualification to continue as such under Section. 25 (2) (d) of the Act. The writ applications have been heard together and will be governed by this common order.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, they had not incurred the alleged disqualification as they were not in arrears of any accrued due payable by them to the Nihalprasad Co -operative Seciety (to be described hereinafter as the 'Society') within six months from the date or issue of a notice by that Society and Annexure -4 in O. J. C. No. 1543 of 1985 and Annexure -1 in O. J. C. No. 1544 of 1985, two certificates issued by the Secretary of the Co -operative Society on May 2, 1985, would clearly show that the petitioners were not in arrears of payment of the instalments due but the opposite party issued notices to them as to why they would not be removed from being Ward Members of the Grama Panchayat having incurred the above -mentioned disqualification and without giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioners of being heard, - passed the impugned order. It has been stated in the counter affidavit put in on behalf of the opposite party that after due enquiry in to the allegations made against the petitioners that they had been in arrears and after opportunity was given to them to show cause and of being heard, the impugned order had been passed under the authority of law.

(3.) WE do not feel ourselves called upon to go into the other questions raised on behalf of the petitioners as the impugned order must be rendered invalid in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court.