Judgment Jamuar, J. 1. This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. It is directed against an order passed on appeal by the Full Bench of Dhangain Gram Panchayat, police station Bikramgunj in the District of Shahabad, 2. The circumstances are these. The petitioner, Ranijag Singh, had lodged a complaint against opposite party Nos. 3 to 7, one of whom was Deocharan Singh, who was himself a panch of that Gram Panchayat. The complaint was that the aforesaid opposite party had cut away some branches of a mahua tree belonging to the complainant and which was standing on plot No. 45. The case was heard by a Bench of Dhangain Gram Panchayat which passed an order convicting the accused before it under Sec.379, Indian Penal Code and sentencing Deocharan Singh and two others to 20 days rigorous imprisonment and the rest of the accused to a fine of Rs. 25/- each. The convicted men filed an appeal from that order to the Full Bench of the Gram Panchayat, which set aside the order of conviction as also the sentence and passed an order acquitting the accused. 3. In the present petition filed in this Court, it was contended that the order of the Full Bench of the Gram Panchayat is illegal and without jurisdiction inasmuch as one of the accused himself, namely, Deocharan Singh, who as I have just stated, was himself a panch, sat on this Full Bench and heard the appeal. This procedure is in clear contravention of S. 56 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act (Act VII of 1948) which provides that no surpanch or panch shall take part in any proceeding in which he is personally interested. The order passed by the Full Bench had to be set aside. Mr. Nawadip Chandra Ghosh, who has appeared for the opposite party Nos. 3 to 7, has not contested this proposition, but he has submitted that while setting aside the order passed by the Full Bench on appeal, a further direction be made by this Court that the appeal presented by the accused persons before the Full Bench may now be re-heard by a properly constituted Full Bench, and for this submission he has placed reliance upon a case of the Supreme Court in Hari Vishnu Kamath V/s. Ahmad Ishaque, (S) AIR 1955 SC 233 (A). 4. 4. It was pointed out in the above case that, while Article 226 confers upon High Courts powers to issue appropriate writs to any person or authority within their territorial jurisdiction, in terms absolute and unqualified, further appropriate orders can also be passed under Article 227 of the Constitution. Clause (1) of Article 227 of the Constitution: provides that every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction. It was observed in the above mentioned case: of the Supreme Court that this superintendence is both judicial and administrative and that while issuing a writ under Article 226, the High Court can only annul the decision of the tribunal, it can under Article 227, do that, and also issue further directions in the matter. In the present case before us, there has been a flagrant breach of the law by permitting one of the accused himself, who was a panch, to sit on the Full Bench while hearing an appeal from his own conviction. The error committed by the Full Bench of the Gram Panchayat is an error apparent on the face of the record and it has to be corrected. The order against which this application has been fifed must, therefore, be set aside, and in my opinion, this Court while doing so can make a further direction under Article 227 of the Constitution that the appeal should now be heard by a properly constituted Pull Bench of Dhangain Gram Panchayat. 5. The application is accordingly allowed and the Full Bench of Dhangain Gram Panchayat will now proceed to hear the appeal as directed above. Chaudhuri, J. 6 I agree.