Subash Chandra Pangi Vs State of Odisha

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 4788 of 2026

¶3

Subash Chandra Pangi ….

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. S.K. Dalai, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

1. State of Odisha, represented through its Commissionercum-Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Drinking Water Department, Govt. of Odisha, AtLokseva Bhawan, Bhubancswar, DistKhurda

¶8

…. Opposite Parties

¶9

2. Collector and District Magistrate, Koraput

¶10

3. District Panchayat Officer, Koraput

¶11

4. Block Development officer, Panchayat Samiti, Koraput

¶12

5. Goluru Gram Panchayat, represented through its Executive Officer, Koraput

¶13

6. Smt. Sabitri Burudi, Naib Sarpanch, Goluru Gram Panchayat, Koraput

¶14

Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA

¶15

Page 1 of 6

¶16

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

ORDER 19.02.2026

Order No.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶21

The Petitioner is the elected Sarpanch of Goluru Grama Panchayat under Nandapur Block in the district of Koraput. He calls in question the legality of the operation of order at Annexure-1 dated 08.04.2025 by which the Naib-Sarpanch continues to function as Sarpanch, notwithstanding that the Petitioner no longer courts the incapacity which had warranted the passing of such order.

¶22

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Dalai, that while discharging his functions as Sarpanch, the Petitioner was falsely implicated for commission of the offences under the NDPS Act and was taken to custody on 26.03.2025 and was released on bail by order dated 08.12.2025 in Misc. Criminal Case No.48758 of 2025 by the Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior.

¶23

It is submitted that because the Petitioner was

¶24

in custody exercising the power under Section 21 of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 and more specifically sub-section 4 thereof, the Naib Sarpanch was directed to execute the power and perform the functions of Sarpanch until further orders in terms of

¶25

Page 2 of 6

¶26

Section 21(4) of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964. For convenience of reference the said Section is extracted hereunder;

¶27

“21. Powers and functions of the NaibSarpanch –

¶28

(1) xxx

¶29

(2) xxx

¶30

(3) xxx

¶31

(4) When the Office of the Sarpanch is vacant or the Sarpanch has been continuously absent from the Grama for more than fifteen days or is incapacitated for more than fifteen days and there is either a vacancy in the Office of the Naib-Sarpanch or the Naib-Sarpanch has been continuously absent from the Grama for more than fifteen days or is incapacitated for more than fifteen days, the powers and functions of the Sarpanch shall devolve on a member of the Grama Panchayat from out of a panel of three such members in order of priority elected in the prescribed manner by the Grama Panchayat in that behalf, who shall be the officiating Sarpanch and shall exercise the powers and perform the functions of the Sarpanch subject to such restrictions and conditions, if any, as may be prescribed until a Sarpanch or Naib-Sarpanch assumes Office, on being duly elected or, as the case may be, takes charge of his Office :

¶32

Provided that in the absence of any such panel or in the case of non-availability of the members on such panel the Sub-Divisional Officer may nominate one of the members of the Grama Panchayat to officiate as the

¶33

Page 3 of 6

¶34

Sarpanch and to exercise the powers and perform the functions of the Sarpanch in accordance with the provisions of this SubSection.”

¶35

It is the grievance of the Petitioner that notwithstanding his release, he is not being allowed to function as the Sarpanch thereby rendering the provisions of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 otiose. Hence, this Writ Petition seeking the following reliefs;

¶36

“xxx xxx xxx

¶37

It is therefore most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: a) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the impugned order dated 08.04.2025 under Annexure-1 issued by the Collector, Koraput under Section 21(4) of the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act, 1964 to the extent it continues to operate even after the return and availability of the petitioner;

¶38

b) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Opposite Parties, more particularly Opposite Party No.2-Collector, Koraput, to immediately hand over the charge of the office of Sarpanch, Guluru Gram Panchayat to the petitioner forthwith;

¶39

c) Declare that the continued functioning of Opposite Party No.6 as officiating Sarpanch in spite of the petitioner being available and willing to discharge his duties is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act, 1964;

¶40

Page 4 of 6

¶41

d) Direct the Opposite Parties to restore all powers, duties and privileges of the office of Sarpanch to the petitioner and to allow him to function without any obstruction or interference;

¶42

e) Pass such further order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case to secure the ends of justice; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.

¶43

xxx xxx xxx

¶44

Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that the Writ Petition is premature in as much as there is nothing on record to indicate that ventilating his grievance the Petitioner has moved the authority more particularly the Collector and District Magistrate, Koraput-Opposite Party No.2. Hence, the Writ Petition cannot be entertained.

¶45

Attention of this Court is drawn to the recitals of the Writ Petition indicating that the Collector and District Magistrate, Koraput-Opposite Party No.2 was in fact moved.

¶46

Be that as it may, taking into account the schematic arrangement of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 and since there is no embargo for an accused-Sarpanch to function as such, this Court finds substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Dalai that the

¶47

Page 5 of 6

¶48

inaction of the Collector and District Magistrate, Koraput-Opposite Party No.2 merits interference by this Court.

¶49

Considering the rival submission, this Court is of the considered view that interest of justice would be subserved, if the Petitioner approaches the Collector and District Magistrate, Koraput-Opposite Party No.2 within a period of four weeks hence along with the copy of this order seeking to continue to function as Sarpanch, he being an elected representative.

¶50

In the event such a motion is made, the Collector and District Magistrate, Koraput-Opposite Party No.2 is called upon to take a decision within two weeks thereafter after giving an opportunity to the Petitioner.

¶51