A single bench of justice Ahanthem Bimol, High Court of Manipur, has directed the state authority not to operate an interim order of suspending the administrative committee of Gram Panchayat and Zilla Parishad.
Further, the HC directed the state to allow the members of the administrative committee of the Gram Panchayats and Zilla Parishads to function in terms of their appointment order.
It should be mentioned that according to the direction the division bench of HC of Manipur passed on February 29, 2024, liberty was given to the state government to appoint an administrative committee for each Gram Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in accordance with law and the provision of the Act.
Pursuant to such direction given by the HC, the state government issued public notification inviting applications from the intending candidates and thereafter, after due process of selection, the in-charge deputy commissioner, Imphal West, who is said to be the competent authority, issued an order dated March 8, 2024 appointing the administrative committees of the Gram Panchayats and Zilla Parishads constituencies of Imphal West Districts, with the administrative approval of the state government.
In the said order, the names of the petitioners are included and it is also provided that the term of the administrative committees will be for a period till the notification of the 6th General Panchayat Election is issued by the State Election Commission, Manipur.
Meanwhile, the deputy commissioner, Imphal West, issued another order dated 20-09-2024 thereby removing the petitioners from the membership and chairpersons of the administrative committees of the Gram Panchayats and Zilla Parishads and replacing them with the private respondents.
Being aggrieved to the order, the petitioners approached the HC stating that they have been duly appointed by following the procedures established by law. They further stated that without following any due process and without giving any reason, they have been removed and in their places, the private respondents have been appointed. According to the petitioners, such actions of the authorities are in complete violation of the principle of natural justice and in colourable exercise of law.
During the hearing, counsel of respondents submitted that after their appointment, the petitioners misused their powers, that they were highly corrupted and they did not discharge their duties. Taking into consideration such actions of the petitioners some of the private respondents submitted a representation to the authorities of the government and pursuant to such complaint, the authorities of the government removed the petitioners and in their place, the private respondents have been appointed after obtaining approval of the government and as such no interference from the court is called for.
However, the HC considered that in the impugned order of suspending petitioners, no reason is disclosed by the authorities indicating the necessity of passing the order. Even if the submissions made by counsel are taken to be true, since serious allegations have been made against the petitioners, they should have been given opportunity to defend themselves and only after holding proper inquiry and on finding of the correctness of such allegations, they can be removed.
In the present case, there is nothing on record indicating that such action has been taken up by the authorities before removing the petitioners and appointing the private respondents, stated the HC.
Taking into consideration such factum, the HC is of the considered view that the petitioners have made out a strong case for passing an interim order.
Accordingly, the HC directed that operation of the impugned order dated September 20, 2024 shall not be given effect to and the petitioners should be allowed to continue to function as the members of the administrative committee of the Gram Panchayats and Zilla Parishads in terms of their appointment order.
The HC granted liberty to the authority stating ‘needless to mention here that as the interim order has been passed without the counter affidavit of the respondents, liberty is given to the respondents to approach the HC even before the next date of hearing, for modification or vacation of this interim order if so advised’.
