Purshottam Pandey v. THE STATE OF BIHAR
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The writ petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
Shri Kamlesh Prasasd Singh son of Ram Bahadur Singh the then Panchayat secretary, Gram Panchayat, Raj Kouru Dhouru Block Manjhi Dist. Saran
Shri Raja Ram Harijan son of Shri Panckauri Ram the then Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Kouru Dhouru Block Manjhi Dist. Saran
Shri Lal Babu Rai son of Shri Jashan Rai the then Panchayat Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Kouru Dhouru P.S. and Block Manjhi Dist. Saran ------- Respondents For the Petitioner: Mr Umesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the State: Mr S.K. Mandal SC 15 -------- 09
07.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that public interest is suffering because in spite of enquiry report disclosing several illegalities or irregularities by the Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat, Kouru Dhouru within the district of Saran, no action is being taken under section 18(5) of the Bihar Raj Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 as amended by Amendment Act, 2007. - 2 - The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State shows that earlier, District Magistrate, on the basis of the enquiry report and other materials, had forwarded his recommendation to the Divisional Commissioner for action under section 18(5) of the aforesaid Act, 2006 but subsequently the Divisional Commissioner by his letter dated 15.04.2008 submitted all the original papers to the Principal Secretary, Rural Works (Panchayati Raj), Department, Bihar, Patna. Thereafter, as per counter affidavit, the Director of Panchyati Raj by letter dated 05.09.2008 has again requested the District Magistrate, Saran, Chapra to forward all the relevant papers and copy of the F.I.R. if instituted against the concerned Mukhiya . According to the learned counsel for the State the counter affidavit does not disclose what further development has taken place after the letter dated 05.09.2008 issued by the Director, Panchyati Rai, Department to the District Magistrate, Saran, Chapra Now the power to take action under sectionn18(5) of the Act is vested in the State Government and it appears that all papers in original have been submitted by the Commissioner, Saran Division to the Principal Secretary, concerned department as far as back on
Operative part
15.04.2008. Considering the fact that the concerned authority, the State Government, has yet not applied its mind to the merit of the allegations levelled against Mukhiya, this Court would only remind the State Government as well as the District Magistrate, Saran, Chapra to expedite the proceedings and if any further document is to be sent - 3 - by the District Magistrate, including copy of the F.I.R. the same should be sent, if not sent already, within four weeks from the date of production/communication of a copy of this order. Thereafter the State Government shall consider the matter on its own merit and take a final decision within two months. It is clarified that if the allegations are also in respect of Panchayat Secretary, then authority concerned will be free to take action against him also in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of. (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ) (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J) shahid
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bihar Raj Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 — s. 18(5); Amendment Act, 2007.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.