The Orissa High Court has upheld the Odisha government's decision to enhance the financial powers of Block Development Officers (BDOs) from Rs 2 lakh to Rs 10 lakh, eliminating the requirement for countersignature by panchayat samiti chairpersons on bills and payment orders within the revised limit.
Court Ruling on Amendment
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice M S Raman dismissed apprehensions that the move weakened the authority of elected representatives in Panchayati Raj institutions. The bench disposed of a writ petition challenging the Odisha Panchayat Samiti Accounting Procedure (Amendment) Rules, 2025, on Monday. The petition was filed by Umesh Chandra Behera, chairman of Niali block panchayat samiti.
Petitioner's Arguments
Behera had sought the quashing of the July 31, 2025, notification amending Rule 16(1) of the Odisha Panchayat Samiti Accounting Procedure Rules, 2002. He alleged that the amendment was arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the constitutional scheme of local self-governance. The petitioner argued that it diluted the powers vested in elected chairpersons under the Odisha Panchayat Samiti Act, 1959. He further contended that the 73rd Constitutional Amendment empowered Panchayati Raj institutions as units of self-governance, and financial control was intended to remain with elected representatives. The exclusion of the chairman or vice-chairman from countersigning payment orders up to Rs 10 lakh, he argued, would undermine democratic accountability.
Court's Observations
The bench noted the petitioner's submission that without the countersignature of the chairman or vice-chairman, elected representatives would not be able to perform their responsibilities in a sensible manner. However, the court rejected this contention, stating that the apprehension was without foundation given the safeguards available under the statutory framework. The judges referred to the state government's stand that the amendment aimed to ensure timely execution, transparency, accountability, and reduce the workload of the chairman.
The court observed that Rules 90 and 91 of the Odisha Panchayat Samiti Accounting Procedure Rules empower the chairman to stop payments made by the BDO and prohibit authorization of payments contrary to law. The High Court held that dispensing with the signing of payment orders or bills below Rs 10 lakh by the chairman does not squeeze, take away, or restrict the financial freedom or power of the chairman. The bench concluded that the 2025 amendment did not curtail the powers of chairpersons as apprehended by the petitioner and upheld the validity of the subordinate legislation.
