Removal of elected officials requires adherence to principles of natural justice, including providing reasons for decisions and allowing for rebuttal of charges, failing which the order is unsustainable.

ORDER :

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

The petitioner was elected as the President of the Mambakkam Panchayat situated at Chengalpet District. The District Collector initiated proceedings under Section 205 (1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. A notice was issued on 04.05.2023. Five charges were levelled against the petitioner. The petitioner submitted his reply to the same. He denied the allegations made against him as false. The Collector accepted the explanation of the petitioner and dropped further proceedings invoking (2) of the Act.

2. The petitioner alleges that the ward members, who had initially lodged a complaint with the District Collector, continued to harass him and prevent the implementation of the Public works, that were being carried on by him. The petitioner immediately addressed the District Collector on 05.07.2023 calling upon that authority to authorise him to perform the duties of the Panchayat. The petitioner wanted the District Collector to give such an authorisation invoking Section 204 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. He pleads that the District Collector did not act on the representation. Instead, the District Collector passed an order on 31.08.2023 cancelling the functional powers of the writ petitioner and entrusted the same to the Block Development Officer and the Deputy Block Development Officer of the concerned block. The petitioner challenged the said proceeding by way of a writ petition in W.P.No.29320 of 2023. This writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 27.11.2023. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal in W.A.No.922 of 2025. The same is pending consideration.

3. The petitioner states that he was originally associated with the ruling party of the State. After a new party was floated by a cine actor, he shifted his allegiance to that party. On account of change in political allegiance, the members of the ruling party started lodging complaints against the petitioner. The Vice President along with three ward members of the village gave representations on 06.03.2023, 20.03.2023 and 10.04.2023 alleging that the petitioner is functioning arbitrarily. They also complained that the President was not convening the Village Panchayat meeting and was indulging in corrupt practices, while granting approval for building plans, levying taxes and in addition, was misappropriating Panchayat funds.

4. The first respondent, taking note of these allegations, directed the second respondent to conduct an enquiry and also to inspect the relevant records and registers. He, accordingly, did so and submitted a report on 13.04.2023. Apart from several other aspects, he pointed out that the petitioner did not serve notice on all ward members, as required by law, for the meeting conducted on 06.01.2023 and 02.03.2023.

5. The first respondent, taking cognizance of the enquiry report of the second respondent, invoked Section 205 of the Panchayats Act and called upon the petitioner to submit his explanation. This notice was issued on 04.05.2023. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 22.05.2023. After the explanation from the petitioner, the first respondent yet again directed the second respondent to inspect the Panchayat record and submit a report. It was done on 19.06.2023. Th