1993 (5) TMI 199 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Violation of principles of natural justice in removal of Pradhan under U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.

Analysis:

1. The petition involves a challenge to the removal of a Pradhan under the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, based on the violation of principles of natural justice. The Petitioner argued that the removal order was passed without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing, as mandated by the Act.

2. The Petitioner contended that the order of removal did not comply with the First proviso to Section 95(1) of the Act, which requires giving the person concerned two opportunities to show cause against the proposed action. The Petitioner cited a Division Bench case to support the argument that two opportunities should be provided - first during the enquiry stage and second when the authority decides on the action.

3. The Respondent, on the other hand, argued that in the case of a Pradhan, if charges are proven, the only course of action is removal, and the notice given at the initiation of proceedings suffices as the opportunity of hearing. The Respondent relied on a Full Bench case to support this position.

4. The Court analyzed the facts and found that the Respondent did not provide a show cause notice or a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner after receiving the enquiry report, as required by the Act. The Court referred to a Division Bench decision which emphasized the necessity of two opportunities for a Pradhan in such cases.

5. The Court rejected the argument that the Full Bench case conflicted with the Division Bench decision cited by the Petitioner. It held that the legislative intent behind the proviso to Section 95(1) was to ensure two opportunities for the Pradhan before removal, considering the importance of the Pradhan's role in village administration.

6. Ultimately, the Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashed the impugned orders of removal, and directed the Authority to take action against the Petitioner in accordance with the law after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing. No costs were awarded in this case.