Pratap Kumar Ray, J.

1. HEARD the learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

2. THOUGH the order under appeal before us is an interlocutory order but to identify the legality and validity of the order it requires in depth interpretation of the statutory provision, namely, section 12 and section 16 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 hereinafter for brevity referred to as said Act, so far as to pass a resolution for removal of Pradhan. Having regard to such state of affairs, along with the stay application we wanted to hear the appeal as well as the writ application. The appeal and the writ application accordingly both are taken up as on day's list for hearing.

3. SERVICE of notice of appeal and all other formalities stand dispensed with.

4. TWO writ applications were filed and accordingly from the identical interim order two appeals have been preferred along with the two stay applications. Both the two appeals, applications and the writ applications are taken up for analogous hearing.

5. THE issue involved in the writ application seeking judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was as to whether removal of Pradhan by the resolution dated 27th Febru