R. BHATTACHARYYA, J. ( 1 ) - The petitioner appellant Mustakim has come up against an order dated 13. 6. 97 passed by the learned trial Judge when the writ application suffered a dismissal on the ground that no bar has been encompassed by the West Bengal Panchayat Act to hold the meeting for removal and adoption of a resolution within six months, by the reason of failure to hold the meeting dated 19. 12. 96 for not been legally convened. ( 2 ) IN the background of the above, it will be unnecessary to give an account of the entire factual exposure of the case save necessary. The Dadpur Gram Panchayat is consisted of 25 members of which the petitioner appellant was the captain of the said Gram Panchayat, namely the Pradhan. However, for the prolonged absence in the meeting of two members in the Gram Panchayat, it bent upon cancellation of the membership. ( 3 ) THE proposal for the removal of the Pradhan, therefore, became a consequential act as the above members flew into rage. The warring groups fell out against each other and went through a spate of litigations to sustain their rival claim. Ultimately, the Director of Panchayat by his Memo No. 777/iii/vp/6a-1/1997 dated 6. 3. 97 intimated the Block Development Officer, Barasat-2 on the strength of the proviso appended to section 12 of the Act that no other meeting could be convened, if the meeting is not held for the removal of the office bearer within six months from the date of appointed such meeting which became all sore in this litigation. A status quo order sprang up and spirally reached the court of his Lordship, the Hon'ble Justice Altamas Kabir where the Hon'ble Court dismissed the writ application hereinbefore quoted in the preface of this order or judgment. ( 4 ) A debate already ensued about the legality or otherwise of the impugned order. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant to support the stay application has submitted that the order is patently wrong as the order passed is not in consonance with the statute. This has been seriously disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent on the footing that the argument of the learned counsel is illusory as the whole Act would be reduced to shambles. This has been seriously disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent on the footing that the argument of the learned counsel is illusory as the whole Act would be reduced to shambles. ( 5 ) TO fortify his submissions, he has submitted that the statute must be interpreted with the preamble, scheme and object of an Act, but not in isolation. Any attempt foreign to statute may result in conflagrant violation of justice and morbidity. ( 6 ) RETURN to examine the provisions of the statute, the words, "at any time" employed in section 12 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 should receive a wider connotation. The second proviso appended to section 12 of the said Act cannot put any lid on the expressions "at any time" above referred to as it can never precede the main section. ( 7 ) IN our view, we do not find any reason to take a different view of his Lordship's order complained of as the law does not afford any unchartered right to withhold and/or suspend the meeting for the removal of the office bearer within six months from the date appointed for such meeting. ( 8 ) IT would be a pure legal fiction for the outer limit prescribed in the proviso appended to section 12 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 that the Pradhan or the Upa-Pradhan, as the case may be, even if commits any misfeasance, malfeasance, misconduct and became the slave of adverse activities of the Panchayat still could continue and is not, therefore, liable to be removed. ( 9 ) THE proviso is not an independent provision of the statute having its main stay in the section itself where the expressions "at any time" is to receive a comprehensive meaning warranting a beneficial construction. The proviso has no independent existence in absence of the main section. The Panchayat Act is a piece of legislation introduced for promotion of welfare of the village where any act done detrimental to the promotion of village, the Gram Panchayat cannot sit on the fence and took the role of an on looker. Therefore, the words or expressions "at any time" in the section opens an avenue to take action for the welfare of the Gram Panchayat. The said proviso cannot read in derogation of the main section. Therefore, the words or expressions "at any time" in the section opens an avenue to take action for the welfare of the Gram Panchayat. The said proviso cannot read in derogation of the main section. A harmonious construction, therefore, should be made keeping in view not only the preamble of the statute but also the objects and reasons thereof. The task of interpretation of a statutory provision must refer to the attempt, the object of which is to discover the legislative intent from the language employed. It should be borne in the mind that the language is at the best an imperfect instrument for expression of human intention. It should not be ignored but obeyed for catena of decisions that the statute always when introduced have some purpose or object to accomplish a systematic and imaginative discretion. If the purpose of a particular provision is easily discernible from the whole scheme of the Act, the court gathers the legislative intent from the language employed by the legislature. Thus, the proviso cannot raise its head to tumble the section. ( 10 ) THUS, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant does not bear any force as it does in respect of the learned counsel for the respondent. Accordingly, the stay application cannot be sustained and rejected. In the advent of our decisions, the stay application and the appeal are disposed of by an order. N. A. Chowdhury, J.-I agree. Later : Let a plain copy of the order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (court) be handed over to the learned counsel for the parties. Appeal disposed of