- (1.) This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the order of the Government dated February 15, 1977 (Annexure P-5) removing the petitioner from the office of Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti, Shahkot, District Jullundur.
(2.) The petitioner was placed under suspension on April 20, 1976 vide Annexure P-1 and the Divisional Deputy Director, Panchayati Raj and Community Development, Jullundur Division, Jullundur was appointed the enquiry officer to conduct enquiry on the following charges levelled against him :- (a) That on 27.2.1976 the Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti took away the proceedings-book of the Panchayat Samiti from the Head Clerk forcibly after the meeting of the Samiti when according to Rule 27 of the Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad (Conduct of Proceedings) Rules, 1961, the proceedings-book of the Panchayat Samiti is to remain with the Executive Officer of the Panchayat Samiti; (b) That the Chairman kidnapped Shri Karam Chand, Member Panchayat Samiti and consequently stopped him from participating in the meeting of the Samiti; (c) That the Chairman of the Samiti has created obstruction in the passing of the budget of the Panchayat Samiti, which should have been passed before 31.3.1976. The Enquiry Officer vide his report dated May 11, 1976 (Annexure P-3) reported that all the charges against the petitioner stand proved. On the basis of the enquiry report the petitioner was served with a notice Annexure P-2 dated August 5, 1976 to show cause as to why he should not be removed from the said office. After taking into consideration the explanation submitted by the petitioner and hearing him personally he was removed from the office of chairman, Panchayat Samiti, Shahkot, on the ground that he suspended the meeting of the Panchayat Samiti on February 27, 1976 without specifying time therein and hereby violated the provisions of rule 23, and that the indefinite postponement of the meeting was possible only under rule 10 with the consent of the members present at the meeting, which was never obtained before postponing the meeting held on the said date.
(3.) The petitioner has challenged the impugned order solely on the ground that the misconduct on the basis of which he has been removed was never the subject-matter of the charge-sheet or of the enquiry. The respondent Development Commissioner and Secretary to Government Punjab, in the written statement admitted that the Chairman could not be removed without a proper enquiry. It was, however, pleaded that during the course of the enquiry it came to light that the petitioner postponed the meeting held on February 27, 1976 indefinitely without fixing any time or date. Consequently, in the show cause notice, Annexure P-2, this charge was also entered and as the petitioner failed to submit any reply to this charge he was validly removed under section 103 of the Panchayat Samitis and Zila Parishads Act.;