Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Substituted vide Orissa Act No. 9 of 2004, OGE No. 1368, Dt - 12.10.2004. 75 - Unless the High Court finds that the view to be perverse and absolutely erroneous it should not as an appellate Court re-appraise the materials and come to its own conclusion : 65 (1988) CLT 597. (xx) Section 11 5 (1) - (A) Allegation that lease of a tank was can- celled - This was done on the basis of a resolution of the Panchayat in which the Sarpanch had one Vote only - Held, he is not at fault. (B) Sarpanch advance Rs. 100/- and there is no provision for it - Held, there is no prohibition - It is only improper and he should be advised not to repeat - This is not delinquency. (C) Sarpanch did not call upon the Secretary to furnish Security - Held, infraction of such duty may be involuntary or omission but not wilful omission. (D) Sarpanch retained cash with him more than the amount allow- able - Held, it cannot be said wilful - He should be pulled up-One such ground can be valid ground for suspension : 1987 (II) OLR 391. (xxi) Section 115 (1) - Order of suspension by the Collector - It infringes the right of elected representative to continue in Office - There must be circumstances existing for satisfaction of the Collector - Other- wise the order is to be stuck down as non-application of mind - Extrane- ous considerations should not creep in - High Court can strike down such order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Held, since existence of "circumstances" is a condition fundamental on the making of an opinion, the existence of circumstance, if questioned has to be proved at least prima facie - It is not sufficient to assert the circumstances exist and give no clue to what they are because the cir- cumstance must be such as to lead to conclusions of certain "definite- ness" : 1987 (II) OLR 407. (xxii) Section 115 (1) - Power to suspend only when conditions stipulated in the provisions fully satisfied - Actions done in accordance with resolutions of the Grama Panchayat on matters within the domain of the Grama Panchayat are not relevant and germane material for exercise of such power - Sarpanch cannot be singled out and held responsible even if there be minor infirmities (though in the present case there was no infirmity to the decisions of the Grama Panchayat) - Undue interference with the affairs of the Grama Panchayat deprecated - Instances of this nature sound the death - knell of democracy at the lowest level : 1987 (II) OLR 538. (xxiii) Section 115 (1) - Suspension of Sarpanch or Naib- Sarpanch - Requirements under Section 115 are all cumulative and should have been complied - Absence of any one of them makes the order invalid : 1987 (II) OLR 391. (xxiv) Section 115 (1) - Suspension of Sarpanch - Collector must be THE ORISSA GRAMA PANCHAYATS ACT, 1964 GRAMA PANCHAYATS MANUAL 76 satisfied that delinquency was "wilful" - (Panchayat - Suspension of Sarpanch - Satisfaction of Collector) : 1987 (II) OLR 391 : AIR 1988 Ori.