RAJ KUMAR BISWAL Vs. SARPANCH, JULUNDA GRAMA PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 24.8.1999 passed by the Sarpanch, Julunda Grama Panchayat against the petitioner who was the Secretary of the said Grama Panchayat. The said order is quoted as under : "You have been suspended from Secretary post vide Resolution No.3, dated 25.7.1999 of the monthly sitting due to your absence in your office without permission and in this regard the Block Development Officer, Binika has intimated that according to Rule 214(d) of the Government of Orissa, G.P. Rule you have been terminated from your post from the date of your absence in office without permission and also in the said letter Block Development Officer has directed to hand over the duty to the Grama Panchayat Secretary Sri Jogindra Hota of the nearby Mahada Grama Panchayat. Hence it has been directed to hand over the duty of Secretary to Sri Hota within three days of the receipt of this letter, if you disobey this then action will be taken according to law. Yours faithfully Julunda Grama Panchayat Sarpanch"

(2.) In the counter affidavit filed by the Sarpanch, it has been mentioned that the order of suspension and termination dated 24.8.1999 which has been passed by the Grama Panchayat by following the procedure laid down under Section 214(d) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act is legal. The resolution passed on 24.6.1999 is legal, as such decision was taken when the members of the Grama Panchayat came to know that the Secretary remained absent by taking unauthorized leave. The Grama Panchayat empowered the Sarpanch to take disciplinary action against him and inform the District Panchayat Officer, Sub-Divisional Panchayat Officer and the Block Development Officer. A copy of the resolution dated 24.6.1999 is annexed as Annexure-1/B to the counter affidavit. The relevant part of the said resolution is quoted as under:

(3.) Resolution dated 25.7.1999 copy of which is annexed as Annexure-1/E to the counter affidavit shows that the resolution was passed to suspend the petitioner and the Sarpanch was empowered to take appropriate action against him, but no where it has been resolved that the services of Secretary be terminated. However, once the Secretary was suspended vide resolution dated 25.7.1999, his services could not have been terminated with effect from the same date and there was no resolution in this regard.