Anil Thakur vs State of Bihar - 2021 Supreme(Pat) 1091

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Pat) 1091

ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY
Anil Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Petitioners: M/s Y. V. Giri, Sr. Adv., Md. Najmul Hodda.
For the Respondents: M/s Archana Meenakshee, Prabhat Ranjan.

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14.12.2020, as contained in Annexure-12.

3. Mr. Y.V.Giri, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has referred to Section 18(5) of the Gram Panchayati Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act). For ready reference, Section 18(5) of the Act is quoted below:—

“18(5) Without prejudice to the provisions under this Act, if, in opinion of the Commissioner having territorial jurisdiction over the Gram Panchayat, a Mukhiya or an Up-Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat absents himself without sufficient cause for more than three consecutive meetings or sittings or willfully omits or refuses to perform his duties and functions under this Act, or abuses the power vested in him or is found to be guilty of misconduct in the discharge of his duties (Disobedience of order of an authority established by law or) or becomes physically or mentally incapacitated for performing his duties or is abscomding being an accused in a criminal case for more than six months, the (Government) may, after giving the Mukhiya or Up-Mukhiya a reasonable opportunity for ex

Click Here to Read the rest of this document