SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Ori) 395

R.C.PATNAIK, D.P.MOHAPATRA
TARINI TRIPATHY – Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J. Patnaik, B.K. Mohanty and A K. Bhagat, for the Appellant; Addl. Standing Counsel, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT :

R.C. Patnaik, J. - This is an application by the Saroanch of Dahana Crampanchayat in the district of Koraput for the quashing of the order of suspension passed by the Collector, Koraput (opp. party No. 1) as per Annexure-7 passed u/s 115(1) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act.

2. The petitioner has alleged that he was elected as Sarpanch of Dahana Crampanchayat in January 1984. There was no dereliction of duty and he has been performing his duties efficiently. But at the behest of some political rivals, action has been taken against him u/s 115(1) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act (hereinafter referred as 'the Act').

3. In the counter affidavit the opposite parties have justified the order of suspension alleging that serious irregularities and illegalities have been committed by the Sarpanch in the discharge of this function. Hence, action was taken against him u/s 115(1) of the Act on the report of the Sub-divisional Officer.

4. Suspension of an elected representative is indeed a drastic action and should not be taken recourse to cursorily and in a mechanical manner. Having vested the powers with the Executive to suspend an elected representative, the Legislature provided saf












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top