IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18022 of 2009 1. MAHARANI SUNITA GANDHA W/O SRI ANJANI KUMAR R/O VILL. + P.O. - GOSALDIH, P.S.- SURYAPURA IN THE DISTRICT OF ROHTAS AT SASARAM, AT PRESENT CHAIRMAN, ZILA PARISHAD, ROHTAS AS SASARAM Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE PRINCIPLE SECRETARY null PANCHAYATI RAJ DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER PATNA 4. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE ROHTAS AT SASARAM 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ROHTAS AT SASARAM 6. THE ADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE ROHTAS AT SASARAM 7. SRI ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA S/O (PRESENTLY NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) DEPUTY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER - CUM - CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DISTT.- BOARD, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 8. THE OFFICER IN-CHARGE MODEL POLICE STATION, ROHTAS ----------- For the Petitioner : M/s Dinu Kumar and Arvind Kumar Sharma. For the Respondent : G.A.7, Mr. Basank Kumar Choudhary, Sr.Adv. 3 26.4.2010 Petitioner is the Chairman of the Zila Parishad, Rohtas, which is a Panchayat at district level under the provisions of Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006. By this writ petition she complained about the conduct of respondent no.7, Deputy Development Commissioner – cum- Chief Executive Officer of Zila Parishad. It is pointed out that by a special resolution adopted by more than 2/3rd members of Zila Parishad , they have resolved and requested the State Government to withdraw respondent no.7 and in his place post another person, as respondent no.7 has become too controversial to be permitted to act as the Chief Executive Officer of the Zila Parishad. Various allegations - 2 - have been made and justification being given by both the sides, the respondent no.7 having appeared and filed a counter affidavit. It is apparent that there is a stalemate in between the elected members and the appointed executive. Respondent no.7, who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Zila Parishad, appointed by the State Government. Such a stalemate is not for the betterment of the district because now under the provisions of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, all developmental activities are to be performed with the approval of the Zila Parishad and if the Chief Executive Officers are at loggerheads then it is the general public that would suffer. This case was taken up on 20th April, 2010 and it was passed over to enable learned counsel for the State to get instruction from the State, which is Department of Rural Development at Panchayati Raj but no instruction has yet been received. I do not find any point in keeping this writ petition pending. In view of the facts, as noted above and the resolution/representation of majority of the elected members of Zila Parishad, I direct the State Government to take a decision in the matter and resolve the stalemate there either by replacing respondent no.7 or taking such other steps that may be necessary, so that functioning of Zila Parishad is not affected in any manner and the elected representations are permitted to work freely to the extent as permitted by law. State must take decision in this regard within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order before the Special Secretary, Panchayati Raj. - 3 - With the aforesaid observations and directions the writ petition stands disposed of. singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)