1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner cha11enges the Correctness, validity and property of the order dated 22.6.96 (Annexure P/15), under which the petitioner has been placed under suspension.

2. According to the petitioner show cause notice dated 23.11.95 (Annexure p/13) was served upon the petitioner. In the said show cause notice, certain allegations were made against the petitioner and she was informed that the petitioner should show cause as to why proceedings under Section 39 and 40 of M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 be not taken against her. According to the petitioner, she filed her reply on 5.12.95. During the pendency of the proceedings before the Sub--Divisional Officer, order dated 22.6.96 (Annexure p/15) was passed by the S.D.O. The petitioner submits that the order Annexure p/15 is per-se illegal because there was no compliance of the provisions of Section 39 of the Act and unless a show calise notice along-with the charge-sheet under the Act for removal of the petitioner is not served, the petitioner could not be suspended. She also submits that the order Annexure p/15 falls short of the legal requirements and does not meet the standard of Section 39. She submits that the order of suspension Annexure p/15 deserved to be quashed.

3. Shri V. Shukla, learned Govt. Advocate and Shri Anil Khare, learned counsel for respondent No.5, on the other hand, have contended that document Annexure' p/13 confirms the standard and meets the necessary requirements as laid down under Section 39, therefore, the Sub-Divisional Officer was absolutely justified in passing the order on 2.6.96.

4. Section 40 of the Act provides as under :-

40 "Removal of office bearers of Panchayat –

(1) The State Govt. or the prescribed authority may after such enquiry as it may deem fit to make at any time, remove an office bearer :-

(a) If he has been guilty of misconduct in the discharge of his duties;

or

(b) if his continuance is undesirable in the interest of the public:

Provided that no person shall be removed unless he has been given an opportunity to show cause why he, should not be removed from his office.

Explanation :-- For the purpose of this sub-section (Misconduct) shall include-

(a) any action adversely affecting

(i) the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India or

(ii) the harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of State transcending religious, Linguistic regional caste or sectional diversities, or

(iii) the dignity of women, or

(b) gross negligence in the discharge of the duties under this Act.

(2) A person who has been removed under sub-section (1) shall forthwith cease to be a member of any other Panchayat of which he is a member, such person shall also be disqualified for a period of six years to be elected under this Act.

A perusal of Section 40 would show that the State Govt. or the prescribed authority has power to remove any office bearer, if he has been guilty of mis-conduct in discharge of his duties or if his continuance in office is undesirable in the interest of the public. According to Section 40, no person shall be removed unless he has been given an opportunity to show cause why he should not be removed from his office.

3. Section 39 of the Act reads as under: _

"Suspension of office bearer of Panchayat –

(1) The prescribed authority may suspend from office any office bearer-

(a) against whom charges have been framed in any criminal proceedings under Chapter V-A, CI, IX-A, X, XII, Section 302, 303, 304-B, 305, 306, 312 to 318, 366-A, 366-B, 373 to 460 of Chapter XVII and Chapter XVIII of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860) or under any Law for the time being in force for the prevention of adulteration of food stuff and drugs, suppression of immoral traffic in women and children and protection of civil rights; or

(b) who has been served with a notice with a along-with a charge sheet to show cause under this Act. for this removal from the office.

(2) The