VINAYKUMAR TRIBHOVANDAS PATEL Vs. ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can a mere irregularity in exercise of powers - without anything more - amount to abuse of power and result into removal of the petitioner from office of Sarpanch ? In the context of the following facts the aforesaid question has arisen.

(2.) The petitioner is an elected Sarpanch of Bhayli Gram Panchayat Bhayli Taluka and District Vadodara. He was elected in June 1979. By a notice dated 15/10/1980 issued under the provisions of sec. 49 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act (the Act for short) the petitioner was called upon to explain certain acts of alleged abuses of power. The petitioner replied to the same by his letter dated 25/11/1980 The competent authorities i.e. District Development Officer (DDO) Vadodara held that the petitioner was guilty of the charges levelled against him. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Development Commissioner. The Addl. Development Commissioner heard the appeal and held that the petitioner was guilty in respect of the following charges:

(3.) The other two charges in respect of which the petitioner Sarpanch was held guilty by the D. D. O. and was exonerated by the Development Commissioner are not required to be referred to for the purpose of the determination of the questions involved in the petition. Before examining the merits of the case we may have a look at the relevant part of sec. 49 of the Act. The section applies to a person who has been guilty of misconduct in the discharge of his duties or of any disgraceful conduct or abuses his powers or makes persistent default in the performance of his duties and functions under this Act or has become incapable of performing his duties under this Act......