JUDGMENT

A. S. NAIDU, J. — The petitioner is the elected Sarpanch of Salabana Grama Panchayat in the district of Keonjhar. His elec¬tion has been assailed before the Civil Judge (JD), Anandapur in Election CMA No. 8 of 2007 which is subjudice. He is aggrieved by the fact that during pendency of the said election dispute, the Collector, Keonjhar has initiated a proceeding under Section 26 of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act and has issued a notice to him vide Annexure-4 to show cause as to why he should not be declared disqualified to hold the post of Sarpanch. According to him such action amounts to double jeopardy and he is being subjected to unnecessary harassment. Therefore he has prayed to quash the said notice Annexure-4.

2. Opposite parties 4 to 9 have entered appearance and have filed a counter-affidavit and so also opposite party No. 3. According to them there is no bar for initiating a proceeding under Section 26 of the G.P.Act during pendency of the election dispute initiated under Section 30 of the Act. Both the proceed¬ings can simultaneously be initiated as the provisions of the aforesaid two Sections are distinctly separate.

3. This Court heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the contesting opposite parties at length and perused the materi¬als available on record.

Section 30 of the G.P.Act stipulates that no election of a person as a member of the Grama Panchayat or as Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch held under the said Act shall be called in question except by an election petition presented in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

Section 34 stipulates that the petitioner may, in an election dispute in addition to claiming a declaration that election of all or any of the returned candidates is void, claim a further declaration that he himself or any other candidate has been duly elected.

Section 39 provides the grounds for declaring an election void. The proviso to the said section stipulates that in relation to matters covered by Section 39 (a), the Civil Judge (JD) shall have due regard to the decision, if any, made under Section 26 before making a declaration under the said section.

Section 26 of the Act on the other hand deals with the procedure for declaring a Sarpanch or a Naib-Sarpanch or any other elected Member of a Grama Panchayat to have become disqualified. For the sake of brevity and better appreciation said Section 26 is quoted hereinbelow :

“26. Procedure of giving effect to disqualification.

(1) Whenever it is alleged that any Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch or any other member is or has become disqualified or whenever any such person is himself in doubt whether or not he is or has become so disqualified such person or any other member may, and the Sarpanch at the request of the Grama Panchayat shall, apply to the Collector for a decision on the allegation of doubt.

(2) The Collector may suo motu or on receipt of an application under Sub-section (1), make such enquiry as he considers necessary and after giving the person whose disqualifi¬cation is in question an opportunity of being heard, determine whether or not such person is or has become disqualified and make an order in that behalf which shall be final and conclusive.

(3) Where the Collector decides that the Sarpanch, Naib-Sarpanch or any other member is or has become disqualified such decision shall be forthwith published by him on his notice-board and with effect from the date of such publication the Sarpanch, Naib-Sarpanch or such other member, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have vacated office, and till the date of such publica¬tion he shall be entitled to act, as if he was not disqualified.”

Section 25 of the Act stipulates that a Sarpanch or any other member of the Grama Panchayat shall be disqualified to continue and shall cease to be a member if he incurs the disqual¬ification morefully stipulated under Sub-sections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Section 25 (2).

4. Thus the Legislature in its wisdom has provided two forums to d