Pradeep Kumar Karji vs Collector And Ors. on 12 August, 1998
In Biswanath Pradhan v. State of Orissa, 44 (1997) CLT 404, this Court held that as a result of the suspension, the person concerned may not be for the time being entitled to continue to function as Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch but the suspension has not the effect of removing him from office. At the stage of passing the order of suspension, there is neither a Us nor a determination by the Collector to call for a hearing. If hearing at the stage suspension is read by implication in Sub-section (1) that would mean that the Legislature envisaged two hearings for the person concerned for the same subject-matter and by two different authorities namely, the Collector and the State Government, a proposition that does not command itself for acceptance. We are in respectful agreement with the aforesaid observations and state that suspension of Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch, as the case may be, being an interim measure, question of issue of any show cause notice to him before the order of suspension is passed does not arise. In the case at hand, however, the Collector issued notice (Anriexure-B/3) to show cause as to why he should not be suspended before the order of suspension was made.