SHAILESH PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Shrishti Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, learned AC to learned GA-2 for the State.

(2.) Petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Lok Prahari-cum-Divisional Commissioner, who was required to furnish enquiry report before the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, in accordance with the provision of sub-sec. 5 of Sec. 152 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, was required to exercise his jurisdiction under Sec. 18(5) of the Act on the basis of the information given in the enquiry report submitted by the Lok Prahari. Learned counsel seeks interference of this Court for allowing the relief(s) prayed in paragraph no. 1 of the writ petition, which inter alia is reproduced hereinafter:

(3.) Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had appeared before the Lok Prahari being Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat against whom the Lok Prahari had proceeded to enquire into the matter. The proceeding books relating to the meeting held in accordance with the provision of Sec. 20 of the Act were possessed by the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, which was not called for by the Lok Prahari and in absence of same to verify the functioning, the report proposing action against the petitioner is illegal. He submitted that the petitioner used to look into the day to day affairs of the Gram Panchayat, as well as, the required meeting used to be held from time to time in accordance with the provision of Sec. 20, as well as, the other provisions of the Act. The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, without giving any opportunity to the petitioner in accordance with the provision of sub-sec. 5 of Sec. 18 of the Act had passed an ex-parte order dtd. 7/11/2023 contained in memo No. 14826.