JUDGMENT : (N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.) : Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Handique, learned standing counsel, P & RD, Assam, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 1, 2, 5, 6 & 7; and Ms. Usha Das, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate, Assam, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 3 & 4. 2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present writ petition, has presented a challenge to an order, dated 07.09.2021, issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj, removing her from the post of Ward Member of Ward No. 6 of North Karimganj Gaon Panchayat on account of violations of the provisions of Section 111(2)(a) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994. 3. The petitioner, herein, was elected as the Ward Member of Ward No. 6 of North Karimganj Gaon Panchayat. The petitioner, at the time of her such election; was a mother to 4(four) children and her last of such children was born on 22.09.2017. 4. The petitioner, at the time of her election, had filed the mandatory affidavit along with her nomination paper and therein, had mentioned that she did not have more than 2(two) living children at the relevant point of time. 5. Subsequently, a complaint came to be lodged in the matter and therein, it was alleged that the petitioner, herein, had sworn a false affidavit to the extent of declaring the number of children she had at the time of submission of her nomination paper and it was contended therein, that she had more than 2(two) living children at the relevant point of time. The said complaint having been received; the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj, issued a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner, dated 16.08.2021, requiring her to show cause as to why, she should not be removed from the post of Ward Member of Ward No. 6 of North Karimganj Gaon Panchayat, for violation of the provisions of Section 111(2)(a) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, read with the provisions of Rule 62(I)(a) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution)(Amendment) Rules, 2018. 6. 6. The petitioner on receipt of the said Show Cause Notice, proceeded to submit her reply in the matter on 21.08.2021, and therein, has referred to the amendment so effected to Section 111(2)(a) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, wherein, it was provided that the provisions of the said section would not be applicable in respect of those persons who had more than 2(two) living children prior to the date of commencement of such amendment. 7. The Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj, thereafter, on consideration of the reply to the Show Cause Notice as submitted by the petitioner, herein, and also the fact that she had 3(three) living children on the date of filing of her mandatory affidavit and the said factor having been suppressed by her, a conclusion came to be drawn against the petitioner that she had filed a fraudulent affidavit with ulterior motive to deceive and mislead/misguide the authorities and basing on such conclusion; proceeded to remove the petitioner, herein, from the post of Ward Member of Ward No. 6 of North Karimganj Gaon Panchayat, in exercise of powers conferred upon the authority under the provisions of Rule 62(I)(a) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) (Amendment) Rules, 2018. 8. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner, herein, is not denying the fact that she had 4(four) living children on the date of submission of the nomination paper but as per the amended provision of Section 111 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994; the restriction of having not more than 2(two) living children would be applicable only in cases of children born after 19.03.2018. Since all the 4(four) children born to the petitioner were prior to 19.03.2018, hence, Mr. Ahmed, the rigors of the amended provision of Section 111 of the Act of 1994, would not at all be applicable in her case. As such, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order, impugned herein, is illegal and hence, liable to be set aside by this Court. 9. Ms. Das, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate, Assam, on the other hand, submits that the issue was not whether the petitioner had more than 2(two) living children at the time of submission of her nomination, but, the false affidavit sworn by her declaring that she had only 2(two) living children at the time of submission of her nomination, which was factually incorrect. Ms. Das, learned Addl. Ms. Das, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate, Assam, submits that since the petitioner had sworn a false affidavit and her reply to the Show Cause Notice, in question, being found to be not satisfactory; the concerned authority was left with no option but to issue the impugned order, dated 07.09.2021. 10. After hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that a Ward Member can be disqualified and/or removed from office on the ground of contravention of the provision of Section 111 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended, if he or she had more than 2(two) living children. However, the said provision, admittedly, would not be applicable in case of the petitioner, herein, since all her children were born prior to coming into force of the amended provision of the Act. If that be so, there can be no doubt about the fact that the petitioner could not have been removed from her office on the ground of contravention of Section 111 of the amended Act of 1994. 11. This brings the Court to the next issue as to whether any penal action could be initiated against the petitioner for swearing a false affidavit. There is no dispute about the fact that the affidavit sworn by the petitioner at the time of submitting her nomination, was false. The explanation submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is to the effect that the same was on account of an unintended error occasioning due to the fact that the petitioner being a semi-literate person, could not apprehend the language and terminologies as included in the said affidavit. The above explanation of the learned counsel for the petitioner is, however, found to be wholly unacceptable. The petitioner could not have put her signature in an affidavit without fully understanding the contents of the same. If that be so, the petitioner, herein, would be liable to face legal consequences for swearing false affidavit. However, it appears that there is no provision in the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, to remove a Ward Member from his office for swearing a false affidavit. It may, however, be permissible under the law to call in question, the legality and validity of the election of the petitioner as member of the Gaon Panchayat for filing the false affidavit. However, it appears that there is no provision in the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, to remove a Ward Member from his office for swearing a false affidavit. It may, however, be permissible under the law to call in question, the legality and validity of the election of the petitioner as member of the Gaon Panchayat for filing the false affidavit. Be that as it may, the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj, in the affidavit filed by it, in the matter; by referring to the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Asma Bibi v. State of Assam & ors., dated 13.09.2023, in WP(c)5265/2022; has prayed that the order of similar nature be passed in the present proceeding. 12. It is seen that in the case of Asma Bibi(supra); under similar circumstances, the petitioner, therein, was removed from the post of Ward Member of the same very Gaon Panchayat on the ground that she had more than 2(two) living children on the date of submission of her nomination. This Court upon consideration of the issues involved and appreciating the fact that all her children were born before the date, the amended provisions of Section 111(2)(a) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, had come into effect; proceeded to interfere with the removal order as issued in her respect from the post of Ward Member of Ward No. 3 of North Karimganj Gaon Panchayat. 13. Rule 62(1)(a) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) (Amendment) Rules, 2018, invoked by the respondent No. 3, herein, while issuing the impugned order, dated 07.09.2021, apparently deals with requirement of furnishing an affidavit that the candidate did not have more than 2(two) living children from a single or multiple partner. As per Rule 62(1)(b), a candidate can be removed from the office of President, Vice-President or Member of Zilla Parishad, Anchalik Panchayat and Gaon Panchayat, if he or she was having two or more children from single or multiple partners prior to the date of commencement of the amended Act i.e. prior to 19.03.2018. It is, therefore, apparent that the impugned order, dated 07.09.2021, has been issued on an erroneous interpretation of the provisions of amended Section 111 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, read with Rule 62(1)(a) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) (Amendment) Rules, 2018. 14. In the above view of the matter; the impugned order, dated 07.09.2021, is, accordingly, set aside. 15. It is, therefore, apparent that the impugned order, dated 07.09.2021, has been issued on an erroneous interpretation of the provisions of amended Section 111 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, read with Rule 62(1)(a) of the Assam Panchayat (Constitution) (Amendment) Rules, 2018. 14. In the above view of the matter; the impugned order, dated 07.09.2021, is, accordingly, set aside. 15. The petitioner, herein, be restored back in the post of Ward Member of Ward No. 6 of North Karimganj Gaon Panchayat, forthwith. It is, however, made clear that this order would not come in the way of the competent authority in initiating appropriate action against the petitioner, herein, in accordance with law, for swearing a false affidavit, if deemed necessary. 16. With the above directions and observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.