Smt. N.K. Ranganayaki vs The Chief Executive Officer and Others

Chandrashekaraiah, J.—The Petitioner is an employee of the third Respondent-Grama Panchayath. The Chief Executive Officer of the Grama Panchayath passed an order keeping the Petitioner under suspension as per Annexure-B. The said order is under challenge by the Petitioner on the ground that the Chief Executive Officer has no jurisdiction whatsoever to keep the Petitioner under suspension.

Section 113 of the Panchayath Raj Act reads as follows:

Section 113: Appointment and Control of employees-

(1) Subject to the provisions of Sections 111 and 112 the Grama Panchayath may, with the prior approval of the Chief Executive Officer appoint other employees of the Grama Panchayath and pay their salaries from the Grama Panchayath fund:

(2) The Secretary may by order, fine, suspend or withhold the increment of any employee appointed by the Grama Panchayath.

(3) The Grama Panchayath may reduce in rank remove or dismiss any employee appointed by it.

(4) An appeal shall lie against an order passed by the Secretary under Sub-section (2) to the Executive Officer and against an order passed by the Grama Panchayath under Sub-section (3) to the Chief Executive Officer, and whose decision shall be final.

Under Section 113(1), the Grama Panchayath is the Appointing Authority. According to Section 113(2), the Secretary can impose minor punishments of fine, suspension or withholding of increment on any employee appointed by the Grama Panchayath and the Grama Panchayath can impose major punishments of reduction in rank, removal or dismissal of any employee appointed by it. Against the orders passed under Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 113, appeal lies to the Chief Executive Officer. Hence the Chief Executive Officer is the Appellate Authority. Therefore, it is clear that no power is conferred on the Chief Executive Officer to keep an employee under suspension. Therefore, it is without jurisdiction.

Hence, I pass the following order:

i) Writ Petition is allowed;

ii) The impugned order Annexure-B is quashed and consequently, the order passed by the Taluk Panchayath as per Annexure-D is also quashed as it is without jurisdiction.