The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of compliance with statutory provisions in appointing an officer for conducting an inquiry, emphasizing the importance of government notification or authorization pursuant to the Act 2006.

JUDGMENT :

[P. B. Bajanthri, J.]

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. In the instant appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment dated 08.03.2021 passed in CWJC No. 23516 of 2019.

3. The appellant was elected as a member of Gram Panchayat Raj Lohdan, Block-Chand, District-Kaimur at Bhabhua for a period of five years from the year 2016 to 2021. She was elected as Mukhiya. Gram Panchayat was allotted funds in respect of implementation of the scheme called “Saat Nischay”. The funds were to be used for construction of concrete street and drainage system as well as for management of drinking water. The funds were transferred to the aforesaid Panchayat and it was alleged to have been defalcated by the appellant to the extent of Rs. 33.97 lakhs. The concerned authority after due notice of the alleged defalcated sum of Rs. 33.97 lakhs issued a show cause notice to the appellant vide memo dated 10.10.2018 by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Kaimur. On receipt of the appellant’s reply, the concerned officer proceeded to invoke Section 18 (5) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (for short “Act 2006”). The matter was concluded by passing the impugned order dated 20.10.2019/01.11.2019 vide Memo No. 7085 dated 05.11.2019, by which the appellant was removed from the post of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj, Lahdan, Block – Chand, District-Kaimur at Bhabhua for the left over period on the charge of alleged defalcation of public funds.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 28.10.2019/01.11.2019, the appellant preferred C.W.J.C. No. 23516 of 2019. The learned Single Judge after taking note of the factual aspects of the matter and prima facie defalcation, proceeded to dismiss the appellant’s writ petition on 08.03.2021. Hence the present L.P.A.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the Senior Treasury Officer, who has been appointed by the District Magistrate for conducting the inquiry, was not a competent person for the said purpose. Reference has been invited to Section 2 (ag) of ‘Act 2006’, according to which, if any officer other than the Sub-divisional Magistrate is to be appointed as an Enquiry Officer, the State Government must authorize the appointee accordingly to discharge all or any of the functions of the Sub-divisional Magistrate. On this score itself, the impugned order before the learned Single Judge and consequent order of the learned Single Judge dated 08.03.2021 are liable to be set aside and present appeal be allowed.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that today he has filed a supplementary counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 pursuant to the earlier order of this Court dated 07.10.2021.

7. Learned counsel for the State submits that this legal issue was not raised before the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 23516 of 2019.

8. The learned counsel for the State then tried to impress this Court in pointing out Sub-rule 4 of Rule 4 of the Bihar Panchayat (Inspection of Officers and Enquiry into Affairs, Supervision & Guidelines) Rules, 2014 (for short “2014 Rules”) to over come Section 2 (ag) of ‘Act 2006’.

9. Learned counsel for the State Election Commission submitted that pendency of this L.P.A. read with interim order not to publish the result is coming in the way of announcing the result in respect of 2021 election. Therefore, State Election Commission be permitted to announce the election result.

10. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

11. Crux of the matter in the present appeal is whether Senior Treasury Officer is empowered to hold an enquiry or not and further proceedings dated 28.10.2019 is sustainable or not.

12. It is admitted fact that the appellant was elected as a Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Raj