Back
R. NATARAJ
Geetha. K W/o Govindaraju – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.NATARAJ,J. - The petitioner being the President of the Seebi Agrahara Grama Panchayat has filed this petition challenging a notice dtd. 16/6/2022 issued by respondent No.2, convening a meeting on 5/7/2022 to consider a motion of no confidence submitted by respondents 3 to 13 herein.
2. The petitioner claims that she was elected as the President of Seebi Agrahara Grama Panchayat on 05th, February, 2021. She alleged that the Upadyakasa of Panchayat and certain members who were inimically ill- disposed towards her were instrumental in moving an application on 8/6/2022 expressing no confidence in the petitioner. Following this the respondent No.2 issued a notice dtd. 16/6/2022, convening a meeting on 5/7/2022 to consider the motion of no confidence. The petitioner contends that under Sec. 49(2) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, a motion of no nonfidence cannot be moved without specific allegations of misuse or abuse of the powers under the Act of 1993. She claims that the grounds on which the respondents 3 to 13 moved the no confidence could not be construed as misuse or abuse of the powers under the Act. It is further contended that the notice issued by the
Procedural requirements for considering a motion of no confidence are mandatory and must be strictly followed, as interpreted from Rule 3(2) of the Rules of 1994.
The court upheld that a motion of no-confidence can be convened by the Assistant Commissioner as per statutory requirements, emphasizing strict adherence to the ten-day notice provision without addit....
The court confirmed that the 15 days notice requirement for a no-confidence motion is met by issuance, not receipt, affirming the legitimacy of the notices issued under the governing rules.
The omission of Sub-section (2) of Section 49 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 means no allegations are required for a no-confidence motion under Sub-section (1).
Procedural irregularities in no-confidence motions do not invalidate proceedings if they do not prejudice substantive rights, as established in prior judgments.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
