Orissa High Court
Mangalpur Gram Panchayat Level vs State Of Odisha And Others on 28 July, 2025
Author: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
Bench: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A. No. 712 of 2023
Mangalpur Gram Panchayat Level .... Appellants
Federation, Jajpur & another
Represented by Adv. -
Mr. Goutam Mukherji, Senior Advocate,
assisted by Mr. S.D. Ray, Advocate.
-Versus-
State of Odisha and Others .... Respondents
Represented by Advocate -
Mr. Debaraj Mohanty,
Addl. Govt. Advocate for Respondents 1 to 5.
Mr. N.R. Routray, Advocate for Respondent No.6.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 28.07.2025
(Hybrid Mode)
03. 1. Mr. Mukherji, learned Senior Counsel refers to the guideline, i.e. ,
Operation Manual of Gram Panchayat Level Federation (GPLF) published by the Odisha Livelihoods Mission, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Odisha. He relies on paragraph-3 of chapter-3 at page 32 of the said Manual which provides for Organizational Structure and defines GPLF General Body and thereafter defines clause 3.5 dealing with GPLF Master Book Keeper (MBK). It is submitted that, after bifurcation of the erstwhile Trijanga Gram Page 1 of 5 Panchayat, two Gram Panchayats were constituted namely Trijanga GP and Mangalpur GP. Respondent No.6 was appointed and working as MBK in Trijanga GP before the said GP being bifurcated to Trijanga and Mangalpur GPs.
2. By filing writ application, i.e. W.P.(C) No.39367 of 2021, Respondent No.6 made a prayer before this Court that her representation Annexure-7 to the said writ petition to be disposed of by the Collector, Jajpur. Learned Single Judge considering the said application and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, directed the Collector to dispose of the representation in accordance with law, within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. The Collector, Jajpur by order dated 23.06.2022 observed as follows :-
"Gone through the representation of the petitioner along with the written submissions of the parties. It is ascertained that the petitioner is now working as MBK in Trijanga G.P. Hence the DPM, OLM, Jajpur is directed to take necessary step as per guideline to transfer her to Mangalpur G.P. if the MBK post is fallen vacant in the said G.P. Accordingly the representation is disposed of."
3. It is submitted by Mr. Mukherji, learned Senior Counsel that the order passed by the Collector is contrary to the manual of the GPLF, particularly to clause 3.5. For convenience on reference, clause 3.5 is reproduced herein :-
"3.5 GPLF BOOK-KEEPER CUM AUDITOR With the approval of the Executive Committee, the GPLF will engage Master Book Keeper -cum-Auditor (MBK) to write the Books of Accounts of the GPLF and train the Community Resource Person (CRP) to help the SHGs in maintenance of records.Page 2 of 5
3.5.1 Appointment.
1. The GPLF-EC may engage Master book keeper cum auditor, preferably a member from ...SHGs, to maintain day to day GPLF office accounts and audit the SHG books of account for yearly;
2. The GPLF-EC will decide the remuneration and other terms of the GPLF Master book keeper for auditor & CRP.
3. The GPLF-EC will have the right to remove the Master book-keeper & CRP from its records for reasons it deems sufficient, including financial misappropriation, poor performance, or any other reasons deemed to adversely affect the functioning of the GPLF & SHG.
4. The appointment, removal, remuneration, and other terms of the master book-keeper & CRP should be validated by the GPLF-GB."
4. It is submitted that, paragraph 3.5 and 3.5.1, as quoted above, were not brought to the notice of the learned Judge of the Single Bench. However, this Court is of the opinion that the Single Bench had expressed no opinion on the merits of the case and directed the matter to be taken up by the Collector and decided in accordance with law. Somehow the Collector did not take into account clause 3.5 of the manual as noted above. Thereafter, another candidate, who was in- charge of the Master Book Keeper of Mangalpur GP, approached this Court by filing the writ petition, i.e. WP(C) No.9873 of 2023, wherein, by an interim order dated 10.04.2023, the order of the Collector dated 23.06.2022 was stayed.
5. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Mukherji refers to the Memo filed by the appellant dated 29.01.2023, copy of which is served on the learned counsel for Respondent No.6 and learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for Page 3 of 5 Respondents 1 to 5. Referring to the Memo, it is submitted that on 24.02.2023 the Collector withdrew the order dated 15.04.2023 by which Respondent No.6 was directed to be posted to as MBK of Mangalpur GP.
6. In response, the learned counsel Mr. N.R. Routray appearing for Respondent No.6 submits that he is not aware whether the order was withdrawn, but he shall obtain instruction on the same, as the memo has already been served on him.
The principal argument of Mr. Routray is that there is letter dated 23.12.2027 issued by the Additional Chief Executive Officer (Operation), Orissa Livelihood Mission, who is also the Deputy Secretary to Govt. in the Panchayati Raj & Drinking Water Department. The said letter encloses a strategy for reorganizing GPLFs and Operationalizing different activities of NRLM in the bifurcated GPs. (Annexure R/6-2).
Mr. Routray, learned counsel refers to para-6 of Annexure R/6-2, which is reproduced herein -
"CRP-CM and MBK The Selection of MBK shall be done as per the selection criteria mentioned in the GPLF manual. The existing MBK will continue as MBK in her domicile GP. In addition, she will be in charge of other GPLF till the new MBK selection process is over without any additional incentive.
The selection of CRP-CM wherever required, shall be done adhering to the guidelines. In order to streamline their placement and for effective monitoring of the GPLF, the required number of community cadres may be selected and placed.
With regard to the performance incentives of Community Cadre, the CRP-CMs and MBK of the newly formed GPLF shall be eligible to get their performance Page 4 of 5 incentives for five years as per OLM letter no.2471 dated 17 th August, 2016."
7. Considering the contentions of Mr. Routray, we are of the considered view that, para-6 of the guideline is same as the earlier manual. Without overriding the manual, it does not favour Respondent No.6, since the first line of the itself is very clear that "Selection of MBK shall be done as per the selection criteria mentioned in the GPLF manual."
8. Mr. Routray, learned counsel for Respondent-6 emphasizes highlights the words "The existing MBK will continue as MBK in her domicile GP." In our considered opinion, the subsequent clarification has to be read harmoniously with the GPLF manual. It cannot be given interpretation that will be opposed to the guidelines prescribed in the manual, which would defeat the purpose of the manual.
9. Mr. Routray seeks some time to obtain further instruction in the matter and respond.
10. List this appeal on 4th August, 2025.
(Manash Ranjan Pathak) Judge (Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge S.K. Parida Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SAMIR KUMAR PARIDA Designation: ADR-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary Reason: Authentic Copy Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 30-Jul-2025 21:01:26 Page 5 of 5