Judgment S. Ali Ahmad, G. C. Bharuka, JJ. 1. The short prayer made in this case is to direct the respondents not to make nomination of Mukhiyas of different Gram Pauchayats under Panchayat Samiti Narkatiaganj Block. 2. The case was earlier adjouned on 25-1-199l to enable the learned counsel for the State to get instruction in the matter. Learned counsel for the State says that he has not received any instruction He wants more time but we do not think that any useful purpose will be served in adjourning the case. The point urged by Mr. Verma is purely legal. 3. Mr. Verma referred to the proviso of Sec.10 of the Gram panchayat Act. This proviso empowered the Collector to nominate Mukhiyas for newly constituted Panchayats besides Members of the Executive committee. 4. The validity of this provisions was challenged in the case of Shital rai and others V/s. The State of Bihar through Commissioner-cum-Secretary, rural Development Department and others and many others, reported in 1990 pur 672 : 1990 (2) BLJ 470 (FB ). In the meantime the Bihar Act No.7 of 1990 was passed by the Bihar Legislature, which was enforced on 30th january, 1990. Under this Act Sec.10 alongwith proviso was repealed. Under the substituted section after the enforcement of Bihar Act 7 of 1990 there is no provision in the Gram Panchayat Act, which empowers the collector or any other authority to nominate Mukhiya or Members of the executive Committee of the Gram Panchayat. 5. We, therefore, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State, allow this application at this stage and restrain respondents Nos.2 and 3 from nominating the Mukhiya or members of the Executive Committee of any Gram Panchayat. Appeal allowed.