LAXMIDHAR TRIPATHY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition is directed against the impugned Order dated 30.03.2006 passed by the State Government removing the Petitioner from the office of Chairman, Nayagarh Panchayat Samiti.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner was elected as Chairman of Nayagarh Panchayat Samiti in the last election held on 11.3.2002. A representation was made by on Sagarika Rath Member, Nayagarh Panchayat Samiti alleging misappropriation of Panchayat Samiti funds by its Chairman(Petitioner) vis -a -vis non execution of developmental works. Since her representation was not considered, she filed a Writ Petition W.P.(C) No. 12999 of 2004 in this Court which was disposed of vide Order dated 17.12.2004 with a direction to the Secretary to Government of Orissa in Panchayati Raj (G.P.)"Department, Bhubaneswar to take a final decision on the aforesaid representation within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of that order. Thereafter, vide Order dated 4.2.2005 the Deputy Secretary to Government intimated the Petitioner as well as Sagarika Rath (complaint) to appear before the Commissioner -cum Secretary to Government, Panchayati Raj Department for personal hearing on 7.2.2005 at 1.00 P.M. but the same was adjourned to 31.3.2005 at 11.00 A.M. on which date the Petitioner sought four weeks time to appear before the Commissioner. On 8.4.2005, a charge memo was issued by the State Government along with an order to show cause within thirty days. In the charge memo, the charges were levelled against the Petitioner showing that in the action plan for the year 2002 -2003 a sum of Rs. l.00 lakh was initially approved for renovation of Parbati Sagar (Tank)) at Baunsiapada. Later on the project cost was enhanced to Rs. 1.50 lakhs by District Planning Officer vide letter dated 4.6.2003. As per recommendation of Palli Sabha, work order was issued in favour of one Laxmidhar Sarangi, son of Chandramani Sarangi of village Baunsiapada. On verification of the voters list, it was found that no such person named Laxmidhar Sarangi was there. The case record reveals that Palli Sabha selected the name of Shri Laxmidhar Tripathy which was subsequently changed as Laxmidhar Sarangi through manipulation by the Chairman. Further Laxmidhar Tripathy, the Chairman, in the name of Laxmidhar Sarangi, executed the project namely, " Renovation of Parbati Sagar" at Baunsiapada at a cost of Rs. 1.50 lakhs and final payment was received by him on 10.10.2003. Thus he has acted as an executant for the Panchayat Samiti himself as the Chairman by changing his surname from Tripathy to Sarangi.

(3.) IN respect of charge memo issued by the Government to the Petitioner, the Petitioner demanded copies of certain documents, i.e., Panchayat Samiti resolution book for the years 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, Panchayat Samiti meeting me, copies of all letters of district administration regarding non convening of the Panchayat Samiti meeting during Assembly Session, sanction letter of District Planning Officer dated 4.6.2003, annual action plan for the years 2002 -03 and 2003 -04, original Palli Sabha book of Baunsiapada Grama Panchayat for the years 2002 -03, 2003 -04 and copies of the alleged disputed Palli Sabha resolution etc. But vide order dated 16.6.2005 the State Government removed the Petitioner from the office of Chairman, Nayagarh Panchayat Samiti which was challenged by the Petitioner in the Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No. 7219 of 2005). The Writ Petition was disposed of vide order dated 21.2.2006 quashing the impugned order of -removal with a direction that the Petitioner would appear before opposite party No. 1 with a show cause, if any, by 28.2.2006 and thereafter the inquiry be undertaken and completed by the State Government as expeditiously as possible and preferably by 17.3.2006. It would be open to the Inquiring Officer to refuse grant of liberal adjournment to either of the parties. It was further directed that the Petitioner shall not exercise financial powers without prior approval of the Collector, Nayagarh till completion of inquiry and the result of the fresh selection shall also not be declared till completion of inquiry by the Government. But it appears that no inquiry was conducted by the Government and the Minister, Panchayati Raj Department directed that the inquiry be conducted by the Collector, Nayagarh. Consequently vide order dated 23.3.2006 the Deputy Secretary to Government intimated the Collector, Nayagarh, the relevant part which is quoted as under: