S.B. Sinha, J. - (1.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that keeping in view the fact that the appellant herein has already been removed in a meeting held on 9th March, 2000, question of arriving at a final decision as regards questions raised in the writ application as also in this appeal does not arise. We may, however, indicate that the questions, which have been raised before us, are whether the appellant ought to have been removed from the post of Sabhapati in terms of section 101 of the West Bengal Panchayat Act as:- (1) proceeding for cancellation of membership of four members is pending consideration before the prescribed authority on the ground of their alleged failure to attend three consecutive meetings, (2) a proceeding for cancellation of a member belonging to Scheduled Case is pending on the ground that the certificate produced by him is not a genuine one and (3) no notice had been served upon the respondents no. 19, 22 and 32. It is not in dispute before us that membership of a member who has been validly elected can be terminated or cancelled only upon passing an appropriate order in accordance with law by the prescribed authority. As the cancellation of membership will have a prospective effect and thus prima facie, we are of the opinion that any meeting requisitioned by members including those against whom cancellation of membership proceedings are pending would not be illegal. The question as to whether the respondents No.19, 22 and 32 have been served with any notice or not or as to whether first notice had been served upon the appellant would be essentially a question of fact and would fall for decision by the learned Trial Judge while disposing of the application. We are, therefore, not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
(2.) However, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and in view of the fact that- affidavit-in-opposition as also affidavit-in-reply have been filed before this court, we would request the appropriate Bench to consider the desirability of disposing the writ application as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of communication of this order. It is agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties that the affidavits exchanged here may be treated as affidavits filed in the writ proceedings. There cannot, however, be any doubt whoever that the appointment of Saha Sabhapati to perform the duties of Sabhapati shall abide by the result of the writ application. With the aforementioned observations, this appeal is disposed of without any order as to costs.
(3.) M.H.S. Ansari, J.-I agree. Orders accordingly. ;