Purnendu Singh, J.—Heard Mr. Y.V. Giri, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Shrishti Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, learned AC to learned GA-2 for the State.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Lok Prahari-cum-Divisional Commissioner, who was required to furnish enquiry report before the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, in accordance with the provision of sub-section 5 of Section 152 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, was required to exercise his jurisdiction under Section 18(5) of the Act on the basis of the information given in the enquiry report submitted by the Lok Prahari. Learned counsel seeks interference of this Court for allowing the relief(s) prayed in paragraph no. 1 of the writ petition, which inter alia is reproduced hereinafter:—

“(i) To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order bearing memo no. 322 dated 07.11.2023 issued under the signature of the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, whereunder in purported exercise of power under Section 18(5) of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, the petitioner has been removed from the post of Mukhiya, Modanganj Govindpur Gram Panchayat, Jehanabad and has been decleared in illegible for election to any Panchayat Bodies till further 5 years from the date of the order (Annexure-P7, Pg.36).

(ii) To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to produce the report of the Lok Prahari-cum- Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya, along with the record of the entire proceedings whereunder it has been concluded that the petitioner is guilty under Section 18(5) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006.

(iii) To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the report of the Lok Prahari-cum-Divisional Commissioner, Magadh Division, Gaya, whereunder it has been concluded that the petitioner is guilty under Section 18(5) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006.

(iv) To issue an appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reinstate the petitioner to the post of Mukhiya, Modanganj Govindpur Gram Panchayat, Jehanabad, with consequential reliefs.

(v) To any other relief for which the petitioner appears to be found entitled by the Hon’ble Court.”

3. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had appeared before the Lok Prahari being Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat against whom the Lok Prahari had proceeded to enquire into the matter. The proceeding books relating to the meeting held in accordance with the provision of Section 20 of the Act were possessed by the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, which was not called for by the Lok Prahari and in absence of same to verify the functioning, the report proposing action against the petitioner is illegal. He submitted that the petitioner used to look into the day to day affairs of the Gram Panchayat, as well as, the required meeting used to be held from time to time in accordance with the provision of Section 20, as well as, the other provisions of the Act. The Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, without giving any opportunity to the petitioner in accordance with the provision of sub-section 5 of Section 18 of the Act had passed an ex-parte order dated 07.11.2023 contained in memo No. 14826.

4. Learned senior counsel pointing to several discussion and the observation made in the order passed by the Additional Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, submitted that merely reproducing certain section contained in sub-section 5 of Section 18 and Section 152 of the Act, he proceeded to exercise his jurisdiction to remove the petitioner on imaginary accusation. He further s