Cuttack: Orissa high court has sought verification of documents submitted in a PIL after the state govt alleged that signatures on them were not genuine, describing the papers as “forged and fabricated”.The division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo, in a recent order, asked the state counsel to produce relevant records to establish whether the documents were authentic or had been “prepared and/or manufactured” for the litigation.The division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo asked the state counsel to produce relevant records to establish whether the documents were authentic or had been “prepared and/or manufactured” for the litigation.The HC was hearing the PIL that challenged finalisation and approval of gram panchayat development plan (GPDP) of Rohinibanka panchayat in Nayagarh district. Umacharan Nahak and three other local residents filed the petition, alleging that it was cleared without a valid gram sabha resolution.During the hearing on Oct 15, petitioner counsel Bijaya Kumar Sahoo referred to the meeting minutes, which reportedly stated that proceedings were adjourned because most members were absent. However, the GPDP document, signed by several officials, including the sarpanch, certified that the plan had been approved at the same meeting.The bench flagged the apparent contradiction, raising questions over whether the development plan could have been approved without the gram sabha completing its proceedings.Additional govt advocate Debashis Tripathy disputed the authenticity of the document relied upon by the petitioners. He contended that the signatures on it did not belong to the concerned authorities and described it as “forged and fabricated”.Taking note of the allegation, the judges said: “In view of the stand of such serious nature is taken, we permit the AGA to produce all relevant documents and also inform the court as to whether those documents are genuine or prepared and/or manufactured for the purpose of the instant public interest litigation on the next date.” The HC posted the PIL for further hearing on Oct 29.The dispute concerns implementation of the July 6, 2026 letter of the director of the State Institute for Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, which, informed district zilla parishad authorities that the Centre had opened the planning window from June 19 to Aug 15 for preparing, approving and uploading the panchayat development plan (PDP) for 2026-27.The letter stressed that the process must be completed mandatorily and directed that all sarpanches be given 15 days’ prior notice to convene gram sabha meetings for the purpose.
