Back
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Deepak – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. Heard the learned counsel Sri Jairaj K.Bukka appearing on behalf of petitioner the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents No.1 to 4 and learned counsel Sri K.M.Ghate, appearing on behalf of respondents No.8 to 20.
2. This petition is filed questioning the no confidence motion issued against Chandrashekar Buya who is holding the office of Adhyaksha of Markal Grampanchayat. The said Grampanchayat has 18 members. Among them, 13 members have requested the Assistant Commissioner to convene the meeting to discuss the no confidence motion against Adhyaksha. The respondent No.4-Assistant Commissioner has issued a notice on 8/11/2022 convening a meeting on the issue of 'no confidence motion' and the meeting was scheduled on 24/11/2022. This notice is under challenge on the following two grounds;
a) 15 days clear notice is not provided before convening the meeting and the same contravenes Rule 3(2) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No- Confidence against Adhyaksha an Upadhyaksha of Gram Panchayat) Rules, 1994 (for short the 'Rules'.)
b) The notice is not sent by the officials of Grampanchayat which is in contravention of mandate of Rule 3(2)
Procedural compliance in no confidence motion notices is sufficient; prior satisfaction of the authority is not necessary, affirming adherence to statutory requirements.
The mandatory and directory requirements of the notice under Section 24(2)(c) of the Orissa Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 must be fulfilled for the validity of a No Confidence Motion meeting.
The court affirmed that compliance with statutory notice provisions in a no confidence motion was sufficient, and challenges based on alleged deficiencies or political motives were unsubstantiated.
Compliance with procedural laws in no-confidence motions under the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act is essential, though timing of notice receipt versus issuance holds significance in evaluating valid par....
The court established that the personal delivery requirement in Section 15(2) is directory, allowing for valid notice delivery to an alternate official.
The requirement of a fifteen clear days' notice for no-confidence motions is mandatory, computed from the date of dispatch, excluding both the date of dispatch and the date of the meeting.
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
