Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 767 (MP)

Munna Bee (Smt. ) v. Jila Panchayat, Mandsaur

2021-12-01

VIVEK RUSIA

body2021
ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 12.7.2021 passed by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Jila Panchayat, Mandsaur by which she has been removed from the post of Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Arniya Nizamuddin under Clause 16 of General Clauses Act, 1897. 2. In the erstwhile election of Gram Panchayat, held in the year 2015 the petitioner was elected as Surpanch of the Gram Panchayat. After completion of 5 years term when the elections could not be held, the State Government directed for constitution of the Administrative Committee in order to manage the day-to-day affairs of the Gram Panchayat. The present petitioner was nominated as Pradhan of the Administrative Committee of Gram Panchayat. Respondent No.2 – Akil Shah made a complaint on 14.6.2021 against the petitioner to the CEO, Jila Panchayat Mandsaur alleging various irregularities and illegalities in the development work in the Gram Panchayat during her tenure as President of Gram Panchayat . A show-cause notice dated 21.6.2021 was issued to the petitioner by the CEO. The petitioner submitted her reply on 28.6.2021 and vide order dated 12.7.2021 she has been removed from the post of Pradhan as the reply submitted by her was not found satisfactory, hence the present petition before this Court. 3. Respondent No.1 filed the reply by submitting that the petitioner has no legal right to claim appointment on the post of Pradhan as held by this Court in W.P. No.9614/2020 and in W.A. No.764/2020.The CEO, Jila Panchayat Mandsaur received various complaints in respect of irregularities and illegalities committed in various works during 5 years' tenure of the Surpanch, hence the show cause notice was issued, and the reply was called. Since the petitioner is not holding the regular post of Surpanch, therefore, the provisions of sections 89 and 40 would not apply and by virtue of general powers conferred under Clause 16 of the General Clauses Act, she has been removed from the post of Pradhan. Hence, no interference is called for and the petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Intervener – Aasha Bee has filed an application seeking intervention in order to oppose the writ petition. After the removal of the petitioner from the post of Pradhan, she has been appointed as Pradhan of the Administrative Committee vide order dated 31.8.2021, hence she has got right to oppose the petition in this petition. 4. Intervener – Aasha Bee has filed an application seeking intervention in order to oppose the writ petition. After the removal of the petitioner from the post of Pradhan, she has been appointed as Pradhan of the Administrative Committee vide order dated 31.8.2021, hence she has got right to oppose the petition in this petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Respondent No.2 submitted the complaint on 14.6.2021 alleging misuse of the post of Surpanch in respect of preparation of Rashion Card, Job Card and implementation of other beneficiary schemes of the State Government and construction of the road with drainage. The Jila Panchayat constituted 3 members committee to inquire about the correctness of above allegations. The said Committee visited the office of Gram Panchayat on 15.6.2021, after perusing the records,gave findings which is filed as Annexure R/2. The Committee has recorded the conclusion that the construction work of 'Nirmal Neer' well and CC road have been completed but prima facie the said Wells is being used by the villagers by their own motors and pipelines for domestic and commercial purposes. Despite knowledge, the Surpanch of the Gram Panchayat did not take any action. In respect of the construction of the road, a conclusion has been recorded that it is not up to the mark as the drainage line along with the road has not been constructed and prima facie misuse of the funds is there. In respect of the cleanliness of the Panchayat, an adverse report has been given. On the basis of such a vague report, the show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 21.6.2021 alleging that she has misused her post of Surpanch and did not work properly. 6. The contents of the inquiry report as well as allegations levelled in the show cause notice, both are very vague in nature. General allegations have been levelled against the petitioner that the work in respect of the construction of well, C.C. Road, drainage is not proper. No specific finding has been given as to how many persons are misusing the well; when the wells were constructed; the details of the roads are also not mentioned as to in which road the drainage line has not been constructed. No specific finding has been given as to how many persons are misusing the well; when the wells were constructed; the details of the roads are also not mentioned as to in which road the drainage line has not been constructed. When the aforesaid show cause notice is vague, the petitioner has also submitted the reply denying all the allegations and without recording specific findings, the CEO has simply said that the reply given by the petitioner is not satisfactory. The relevant part of the order is reproduced below: ^^tkapdrkZ ds tkap Áfrosnu ds vk/kkj ij Á/kku xzke iapk;r vjfu;k futkeq)hu }kjk xzke iapk;r esa mDr vfu;fer :i ls dk;Z fd;s tkdj vius Á/kku inh; drZO;ksa ds Áfr ?kksj ykijokgh rFkk mnklhurk cjrus ds QyLo:i Á/kku ds in ls i`Fkd fd;s tkus ds iwoZ v)Z&Ukf;d ÁfØ;k ds rgr lquokbZ dk volj Ánku djrs gq,s vius cpko i{k esa dksbZ lk{;@nLrkost ;k ekSf[kd@fyf[kr esa fnukad 28-6-2021 dks mifLFkr gksdj tokc ÁLrqr fd;s tkus gsrq i= Øekad 3546 fnukad 3-2-2021 ls lwpuk&i= tkjh fd;k x;kA Á/kku xzke iapk;r vfjfu;k futkeq)hu lfpo ds lkFk fnukad 28-6-2021 dks mifLFkr gq,sA tokc esa tkap Áfrosnu esa ikbZ vfu;ferrkvksa dk larks"kÁn mRrj ugha fn;k x;kA esjs }kjk lEiw.kZ Ádj.k esa tkap Áfrosnuksa rFkk layXu vfHkys[kksa] i=ksa dk voyksdu] v/;;u ,oa euu fd;s tkus ij eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij igqapk gwa fd çèkku xzke iapk;r vjfu;k futkeq)hu dks xzke iapk;r ds fuekZ.k dk;ksZ ds fy;s Ánk; jkf'k dk nq:i;ksx fd;k x;k o xzke iapk;r esa euekus vr% Jherh eqUukch&;kdqc] Á/kku] Á'kkldh; lfefr] xzke iapk;r vjfu;k futkeq)hu tuin iapk;r eanlkSj ftyk eanlkSj }kjk fuekZ.k dk;¨Z esa 'kkldh; /ku jkf'k dk vfu;fer :i ls O;; djus euekus The aforesaid order is stigmatic in nature and that is likely to be used against the petitioner by her rivalries in the upcoming elections. The power of removal given to the CEO has been used arbitrarily and without any basis and material against the petitioner. The intervener has no right to object to this writ petition as she is working as a stopgap arrangement. 7. Although this Court has held that no person has a statutory right to be appointed as Pradhan. Once a person has been appointed as Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, he or she cannot be removed by any vague allegations in order to damage his or her political career. 7. Although this Court has held that no person has a statutory right to be appointed as Pradhan. Once a person has been appointed as Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat, he or she cannot be removed by any vague allegations in order to damage his or her political career. The impugned order is unsustainable in law and accordingly, it is quashed. With the aforesaid, this petition is allowed with costs of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) payable to the petitioner by Jila Panchayat Mandsaur.