- (1.) THIS mandamus-appeal is at the instance of the private-respondents in a writ-application and is directed against the order dated August 3, 2007 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship allowed the writ-application by setting aside the notice dated 26th February, 2007 issued by the prescribed authority for election in order to fill up the post of Pradhan of the Harishchandrapur-ll Gram panchayat who was earlier removed on requisition.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to filing of the writ-application out of which the present mandamus-appeal arises may be summed up thus : (a) The writ-petitioners, seven in number, are the members of a gram Panchayat and they disputed the legality of the notice dated 26th February, 2007 issued by the prescribed authority and the Block Development Officer for convening a meeting of the concerned Gram Panchayat to be held on 6th March, 2007 for election of the Pradhan of the concerned Gram panchayat. The only ground on which the notice had been challenged is that the same had been issued in contravention of the provisions contained in Rule 6 of the West Bengal panchayat (Constitution) Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ). (b) A requisition meeting was held on September 14, 2006 at the instance of the present appellants and a resolution for removing the Pradhan namely, Smt. Tahera Khatoon was carried by the majority members of the Gram Panchayat. The prescribed authority, consequently, issued a memo dated 21st september, 2006 declaring that the Pradhan stood removed from her office. (c) In the meeting held on 14th September, 2006, by which the pradhan was removed, three members of the Gram panchayat cast their votes defying the whip of the recognised political party which set them up for election to the concerned gram Panchayat and accordingly, on receipt of a complaint, the prescribed authority had subsequently initiated proceeding under Section 213a of the West Bengal panchayat Act. (d) In the meantime, the prescribed authority directed the pradhan to handover charge to the Upa-Pradhan of the Gram panchayat on 9th October, 2006 and in terms of the provisions contained in Rule 6 of the aforesaid Rules, a casual vacancy in the office of Pradhan of the concerned Gram Panchayat had to be filled up by election within 30 days from the date of occurrence of such vacancy or within such further time as allowed by the District Panchayat Election officer by calling a meeting of all the members of the Panchayat who are eligible to participate. (e) The members of the Gram Panchayat, at whose instance smt. Tahera Khatoon was removed from the office of the pradhan, had moved the prescribed authority vide their notice dated 13th November, 2006 whereby they had demanded for taking appropriate steps for filling up the vacancy in the office of the Pradhan. In spite of service of such notice, the prescribed authority did not take action and feeling aggrieved thereby, the present appellants filed a writ-application before this Court being W. P. No. 25165 (W) of 2006 and a prayer was made for a direction upon the prescribed authority for holding fresh election of the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat. (f) When the said writ-application came up for hearing before a learned Single Judge of this Court, the proceedings for disqualification of those three members of the Gram Panchayat under Section 213a were pending and accordingly, the learned single Judge disposed of the said writ-application by order dated 15th December, 2006 by holding that "the prescribed authority should conclude the proceeding under Section 213a of the Act in terms of the appellate forum before holding the election for Pradhan" and "the election of the Pradhan should be made immediately after the conclusion of the said proceeding". (g) The proceeding for disqualification initiated under Section 213a of the Act culminated in declaration by the prescribed authority that the members against whom the proceedings were initiated ceased to be members of the Gram Panchayat and such order was passed by the prescribed authority on 5th January, 2007. The said order, however, was set aside in appeal by an order of the appellate authority dated 14th february, 2007 and the appellate order had been challenged in a writ-application being W. P. No. 3600 (W) of 2007 which is pending. There is, however, no interim order staying the operation of the appellate order in the said pending writ-application. (h) In the meantime, the prescribed authority issued a notice on 26th February, 2007 for the election of the Pradhan of the gram Panchayat and in fact, a meeting had already been held and a new Pradhan was elected but no effect thereto could be given because of interim order passed in the writ-application out of which the present mandamus-appeal arises. (i) Ultimately, the learned Single Judge, by the order impugned herein, has set aside the notice issued by the prescribed authority on the ground that the same was illegal as the district Panchayat Election Officer had not given him permission to issue such notice.
(3.) BEING dissatisfied, the appellants who were the private-respondents before the learned Single Judge have come up with the present mandamus-appeal.;