IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2976 of 2011 ARUN KUMAR PASWAN . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 02. 25.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for the State. The petitioner is the Mukhiya of Village- Bhagwanpur Kamla, Block- Ujiarpur, District- Samastipur, aggrieved by the order dated 13.1.2011 passed by the Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj under Section 18 (5) of the Bihar Gram Panchayat Raj Act unseating him from the post. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was only one charge relating to two schemes. The petitioner submitted his reply. Comments were called for from the District Magistrate. Copy of the same was never given to the petitioner. Without prejudice to the same on the first charge the District Magistrate reported that the defence of the petitioner was suspicious with regard to muster roll entry even though he refers to the Measurement Book. On the second charge, the District Magistrate acknowledges planting of trees but they were not fruit bearing, he acknowledges that mud moulds were laid though not completed, and again he acknowledges that 2 the plants were sown but states that they were not taken proper care of. The submission therefore is that there can be no indictment on suspicion without a positive finding of guilt. Once the works were found to have been done. The question of abuse of power and misconduct does not arise. The conclusion is based on the comments furnished by the District Magistrate, abdicating statutory powers by the Principal Secretary acting at the direction of the District Magistrate without due application of mind by a reasoned and considered order. Learned counsel for the State refers to the cause shown by the petitioner to submit that, if the fencing and the plants were eaten any by Animals as was suggested on behalf of the petitioner, he should have lodged a First Information Report against the concerned. The legal aspects raised in this application have all been considered by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 18905 of 2010 and C.W.J.C. No. 10659 of 2009. The impugned order dated 13.1.2011 is clearly not sustainable. It is accordingly set aside. The application stands allowed. P.K. ( Navin Sinha, J.)