Procedural fairness requires authorities to provide reasons when suspending elected representatives; mechanical actions without due justification are invalid.

ORDER :

R.K. PATTANAIK, J.

1. Heard Mr. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Swain, learned counsel for the State.

2. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned order as at Annexure-1 of opposite party No.2 on the grounds stated therein.

3. Mr. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an elected representative but she has been placed under suspension by the order of opposite par.t2y No dated 19th March, 2025. The further submission is that no criminal case has been registered against the petitioner, hence, therefore, such an order of suspension is not legally tenable.

4. The contention is that no opportunity of hearing was provided before the order of suspension against the petitioner and in a mechanical manner, opposite party No.2 passed the impugned order i.e. Annexure-1 and hence, the same is liable to be interfered with. In support of such contention, Mr. Nanda, learned counsel relies on orders of this Court in W.P.(C) Nos.9149 and 16166 of 2025 dated 15th July, 2025 and 19th June, 2025 respectively besides the case laws, such as Nutan, Kumar Rout Vs. State of Orissa and others 111 (2011) CLT 345, Amiya Kumar Pani Vrs. State of Orissa and others 112(2011) CLT 52,9 Kapala Bulu Vrs. State of Orissa and others MANU/OR/1293/202,2 Basudev Dandasena Vrs. State of Orissa and others 2009(1) CLR (SC) 278 and finally, Pramod Kumar Tripathy Vrs. State of Orissa and others 2009 (2) CLR (SC) 402 to contend that such a decision of opposite party No.2 without any clear opinion and conclusion reached at cannot be sustained in law. 

5. Mr. Swain, learned AGA for the State, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner and other are involved in misappropriation of Govt. fund and hence, an FIR has been lodged and refers to the counter affidavit, while claiming so. The further submission is that opposite party No.2 did not err or commit any wrong or illegality, while placing the petitioner under suspension, hence, rightly, the powers conferred under Section 115 (2) of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964  (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) is exercised and therefore, the impugned order i.e. Annexure-1 is not to be disturbed.

6. Admittedly, a criminal case is registered pursuant to a report dated 1t5h October, 2024 pending in the file of learned J.M.F.C., Boisinga in G.R. Case No.508 of 2024 as revealed from the counter affidavit of opposite party Nos.3 and 6s. It is claimed that in view of the misappropriation alleged against the petitioner and others, the FIR was lodged and it was consequent upon an inventory held with a report received from the concerned Tahasildar. The contention of Mr. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no order of conviction and hence, it is not a bar in terms of Section 25(1)(g) of the Act. That apart, the submission is that opposite party No.2 has not considered the plea of the petitioner with a show cause called for and mechanically directed the suspension followed by the impugned order i.e. Annexure-1.

7. In Basudev Dandasen a(supra), it has been held by this Court that reasons are to be assigned while placing a Sarpanch and Naib Sarpanch under suspension exercising power under Section 115 (1) of the Act. In Kapala Bulu (supra), a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court further held that while exercising powers under Section 25 of the Act, the competent authority is not to act mechanically. In Amiya Kumar Pani (supra), it is held by the Court that allegations are to be looked into before any such order of suspension passed by the authority concerned as per the Act. In Nutan Kumar Rout (supra), it is concluded that reasons are to be assigned while taking action as per the provisions of the Act even while placing a Sarpanch or a Naib Sarpanch under suspension.

8. It is settled law that any such action by the State Government in terms of the Act shall have to be according to the provisions of Section 115 of the Act. On a bare readin