Reasonable opportunity after enquiry report is mandatory before removing a Pradhan; removal and appellate orders quashed.

Removal of a Pradhan under the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act was held unsustainable where no meaningful post-enquiry show-cause opportunity was given before the final order. The Court applied the proviso to Section 95(1) and held that reasonable opportunity requires notice and hearing after the enquiry report, when the authority considers the material and proposes action. As the order of removal was passed on the enquiry report without affording that opportunity, the action violated both the statutory mandate and principles of natural justice. The removal order and the appellate order were accordingly quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order removing the Pradhan from office was vitiated for non-compliance with the requirement of reasonable opportunity of showing cause under the proviso to Section 95(1) of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947.

Analysis: The petition was founded on the contention that after the enquiry report was submitted, no further show-cause notice or hearing was afforded before the final order of removal was passed. The Court held that the statutory proviso contemplated a meaningful opportunity after the enquiry, when the authority applies its mind to the material and proposes the action. It found that the impugned order was based on the enquiry report without granting such post-enquiry opportunity, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and the statutory requirement. The earlier Full Bench decision was distinguished because the relevant proviso had been inserted later.

Conclusion: The removal order and the appellate order were unsustainable and were quashed for violation of the requirement of reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---