IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.20619 of 2010 RITA DEVI WIFE OF GOPAL KUMAR THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DAGARSHAM, P.S. BAHADURPUR, DISTRICT DARBHANGA. … PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATI RAJ, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. ANUSHRAWAN PADADHIKARI, PANCHAYATI RAJ, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 4. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, DARBHANGA. 5. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, DARBHANGA. 6. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BAHADURPUR BLOCK, DISTRICT DARBHANGA. 7. BLOCK EDUCATION EXTENSION OFFICER, BAHADURPUR BLOCK, DISTRICT DARBHANGA. … RESPONDENTS. For the petitioner: Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate. For the State: M/s. Anjani Kumar, AAG-10 & Shailendra Kumar Singh AC to AAG-10 ----------- 2. 22.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State who prayed for time to seek instruction in the matter and file counter affidavit but considering the contents of the impugned order dated 8.12.2010, Annexure-1 as also the nature of the order which the Court is proposing to pass request of the counsel for the State for grant of adjournment is being refused and the matter is disposed of. 2. Petitioner happens to be the Mukhiya of 2 Gram Panchayat Raj Tikapatti, Deokuli within Bahadurpur Block in the district of Darbhanga, she is aggrieved by the order dated 8.12.2010, Annexure-1 passed by the competent authority of the State Government, whereunder she has been removed from the office of Mukhiya in exercise of powers contained in Section 18(5) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006(hereinafter referred to as the Act). It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from perusal of paragraph 9 of the impugned order it would appear that the show-cause filed by the petitioner before the Secretary Panchayati Raj Department in response to the notice for removal under Sub-section(5) of Section 18 of the Act dated 31.8.2009 has not been considered as from paragraph-9 of the said order it will appear that the show-cause reply has been found unsatisfactory but reasons in support of such findings has not been recorded in the impugned order. 3. Having appreciated the aforesaid submission, in view of the contents of the show–cause reply dated 31.8.2009, Annexure-15/1, I set aside the order dated 8.12.2010 and remit back the matter to the competent authority of the State Government to pass fresh order 3 dealing with the submissions made by the petitioner in her show-cause reply dated 31.8.2009, Annexure-15/1 appropriate orders in this regard be passed, as early as possible, in any case within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order before the competent authority. Ibrar/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)