SHANTI DEI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are all Ward Members of Bajapura Grama Panchayat under Mahanga Block in the district of Cuttack. Their grievance is that the Sarpanch of that Panchayat did not convene any meeting of the Gram Panchayat or Pali Sabha in spite of their repeated demands, as a result of which the funds received from 11th Finance Commission and other sources could not be utilised and developmental work of the Panchayat could not be undertaken. They claim that they made representation to the Collector, Cuttack and in spite of direction of the Collector and District Panchayat Officer; the Sarpanch neither called any meeting nor attended to any developmental work. So, finding no other way, they filed G.P.Misc. Case No. 21 of 2003 before the Collector, Cuttack demanding disqualification of Sarpanch under the provision of Section 25(2)(b) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act (in short, 'the Act') pleading inter alia that the Sarpanch failed to attend four consecutive meetings from January, 2003 to April, 2003. The Sarpanch also appeared before the Collector and demanded disqualification of the petitioners on the ground that petitioners failed to attend four consecutive meetings of the Grama Panchayat and filed G.P.Misc. Case No. 31 of 2003. Learned Collector disposed of those Misc. Cases on 19.11.2003 directing both the parties to call and attend the meetings and to run the affairs of the Panchayat smoothly. But instead of calling the meetings, the Sarpanch -opposite party No. 4 preferred a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 1362 of 2003 and petitioners also preferred W.P.(C) No. 13627 of 2003 before this Court. This Court while disposing of those writ petitions, quashed the above said order of the Collector, Cuttack and directed the Collector to dispose of the matter afresh in accordance with law but expeditiously. Both parties accordingly appeared before the Collector, Cuttack, who after hearing the parties and perusing the resolution book of the office of Sarpanch, Bajapura Grama Panchayat passed the impugned order disqualifying the petitioners as Ward Members of the said Grama Panchayat in exercise of authority under Section 25(2)(b) of the Act on the ground that they failed to attend consecutive Grama Panchayat meetings held on 16.11.2002, 27.12.2002, 14.1.2003 and 28.2.2003. That order of the Collector is now under challenge.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for petitioners stated that learned Collector, Cuttack while passing the impugned order not only failed to appreciate the meaning and spirit of statutory provision in Section 25 (2)(b) of the Act and Rule 228 of the Grama Panchayats Rules, but also omitted to afford opportunity to the petitioners to counter/rebut the evidence which was relied upon. Learned counsel also alleged that although learned Collector recorded order of disqualification against the petitioners in G.P.Misc. Case No. 31 of 2003 he failed to record any finding on the allegations of the petitioners in G.P.Misc. Case No. 21 of 2003.

(3.) SECTION 25 (2)(b) of reads thus : 'Disqualification for membership of Grama Panchayat -