Misconduct under Section 39(1)(i) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act requires wrongful intention; mere irregularities without intent do not constitute misconduct.

ORDER :

S. G. Mehare, J.

The petitioner, in both petitions, has impugned the order of the Hon'ble Minister passed in case No. VPM-2023/Pan.Kra.10/ PanRa-6, dated 23.01.2024.

2. The brief facts of the cases are that the petitioner is a voter of the village panchayat, and respondent No.1 is the elected member and Sarpanch of the Village Panchayat. He made a complaint against respondent No.1 under section 39(1) (i) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 ("Act, 1959", for short), alleging that respondent No.1, by misusing and exceeding his powers issued the death and birth certificates and succession certificates to the villagers. It is a misconduct in the discharge of his duties, his acts are disgraceful conduct and negligence.

3. On the complaint of the petitioner, respondent No.3, Divisional Commissioner, directed the Deputy Chief Executive Officer to hold an inquiry as contemplated in proviso to section 39 of the Act, 1959. He further directed to the Block Development Officer to hold inquiry. The Block Development Officer directed the Extension Officer (Panchayat) to hold inquiry. He served a notice upon respondent No. 1, gave him hearing and recorded the statements of the concerned. He submitted his report dated 11.01.2022 and opined that respondent No. 1 is found guilty of issuing death certificates without having powers and entries in th original Birth and Death Register.

4. Respondent No. 2 issued a notice to respondent No 8/original respondent No.1. He appeared and filed his written statement denying the report and allegations. He had a case that the petitioner did not approach before the Court with clean hands. The petitioner lodged a false complaint for his personal gain. He was blackmailing them. He had no right to file petition. Except him, nobody complained. There were no complaints against him. One villager had requested to issue the certificate having no entry of death of his parents. However, inadvertently, the Clerk of the Village Panchayat instead of issuing a certificate of having no entry in the Birth and Death Register, issued him a death certificate. He obtained his signature hastily. After realizing the mistake, he cancelled the said certificates and the Secretary under section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 also cancelled those certificates. The Deputy Superintendent of Land Records was also informed, accordingly. The Villager to whom the death certificate was issued also sworn in an affidavit. Since the mistake was corrected, it could not be said that he has misused his powers and it is a misconduct. The Chief Executive Officer did not give him an opportunity to explain during the inquiry and it was an ex parte report.

5. Thereafter, respondent No.2, by his order dated 07.05.2022 again called report of respondent No. 4. He hold a fresh inquiry. He heard the petitioner and respondent and submitted his report to respondent No.2 on 12.07.2022. He recorded the findings that there were no death entries of the villagers in death register. As per Rule 8 of the Maharashtra Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 2000, Gramsevak is a Registrar for villages and he had the powers to issue such certificates. He opined that it is clear that the Sarpanch has misused his position by issuing the death certificates to the villagers under his signature and stamp, therefore for the above reasons the action should be taken against the Sarpanch under Section 39(1)(i) of the Act, 1959.

6. Respondent No. 2 found it necessary to have the statement of the Clerk of the village panchayat. Hence, by order dated 27.09.2022, respondent No.2 again directed respondent No.4 to hold a fresh inquiry.

7. Once again the Deputy Chief Executive Officer directed to the Block Development Officer and he directed the Extension Officer to hold an inquiry. The Extension Officer made inquiry for the third time. One more allegation of issuing the heirship certificate was made at this time. He recorded the statements of the con