30 jdt. 23.09.2026 jb. WPA 26755 of 2026 (Israil Sekh vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) Sarwar Jahan Mr. A. Bhattacharyay …. For the Petitioner Mr. Mrinal Kanti Sardar …. For the State Shahan Shah …. For the Respondent no. 7 Mr. Tirthankar Dhali Mr. Najimul Hoque Choudhury Mir Md. Minhaj Parvej Alam Ms. Priya Chowdhury Md. S. Jaman Mr. Sanjit Nandi … For the Respondent nos. 9-16 Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. The petitioner is a resident of village Shibnagar and a voter under Nowda Gram Panchayat. He submitted a complaint before the Prescribed Authority and Sub Divisional Officer, Berhampore on 12th June, 2026 seeking removal of private respondents/members of the Panchyat in terms of Section 8 (c) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the private respondents/their family members have participated in several tenders issued by the Gram Panchayat and have been issued work orders by the Panchayat. They are disqualified 2 from the membership of the Panchayat under Section 8(c) of the Act of 1973. Opposing such allegation, learned counsel for the private respondents submits that the petitioner has no locus standi to submit such complaint since he is not an elected member of the Panchayat. I have considered the rival contention of the parties. The petitioner appears to be the whistle blower to the acts of the private respondents. He has drawn the attention of the concerned authority to the participation of the private respondents in the tenders issued by the Panchayat. It cannot therefore be said that the petitioner has no locus standi to submit such complaint against the private respondents. Section 8 of the Act deals with disqualification of members of the Panchayat on several grounds. Section 8(c) enumerates such disqualification if the member directly or indirectly by himself or by his partner or employer or employee, has any share or interest in any contract with, by or on behalf of the relevant Panchayat. In the instant case, the petitioner alleges participation of the private respondents/their relatives in various tenders issued by the Panchayat and work orders issued in their favour. Pursuant to the complaint, the Block Development Officer called for a report from the Pradhan which was submitted by the latter on 12th August, 2026. The report supports the 3 contention of the petitioner and discloses the tenders/work orders issued in favour of the private respondents and their relatives by the Panchayat. The said report has been forwarded to the Sub Divisional Officer by the Block Development Officer on 8th September, 2026. Surprisingly, the Block Development Officer has recorded that two of the members Jamrul Hossain and Jamal Saikh have admitted having executed work orders issued by the Panchayat. The other six members have not admitted such execution. The Block Development Officer recommended appropriate action against the said two members. In view of the report submitted by the Pradhan prima facie disclosing involvement of all the private respondents/their relatives in tenders/work orders issued by the Panchayat, their admission of such allegation is irrelevant. In view of the provision laid down under Section 8(c) of the Act of 1973, the Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar Berhampore, being the 4th respondent herein, is directed to deal with the complaint submitted by the petitioner in the light of the report submitted by the Pradhan of the Panchayat and arrive at a reasoned decision in terms of Section 8(c) of the Act upon granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the petitioner and the private respondents. 4 The entire exercise shall be completed by the 4th respondent within four weeks from the date of communication of this order. The writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition shall be deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)