The court upheld the validity of the no confidence motion requisition under the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, confirming the necessity for clear allegations and the petitioner's failure to disclose key facts undermined his case.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Kumar Verma, J.

Heard Mr. Bindhyachal Singh, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Amit Shrivastava, learned Senior counsel for the Respondent Nos. 8 to 10 and 17, 18 and 20, Mr. Kundan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 13 and 19, Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned Standing Counsel No. 3 for the State and Mr. Ravi Ranjan and Mr. Girish Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 2.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs;

“(i) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ for quashing of the letter no. 05 dated 02.01.2024 issued under the signature of the Block Development Officer, Chhaurahi, Begusarai whereby the petitioner being the Prakhand Pramukh, Chhaurahi has been requested to take necessary steps in view of the application enclosed along with the aforesaid letter signed by the Ex- Pramukh namely Manoj Kumar and other nine members of the Panchayat Samiti for convening special meeting for considering the proposal of no confidence against the petitioner and Up-Pramukh of the concerned Panchayat for their unsatisfactory performance.

(ii) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ for quashing of the requisition /application purportedly signed by the Ex- Pramukh namely Manoj Kumar and other nine Panchayat Samiti members of Block- Chhaurahi, Begusarai whereby they have requested the petitioner being Pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti to convene a meeting for proposal of no confidence motion against him as well as the Up-Pramukh. Though the aforesaid requisition is absolutely inconsistent to the mandate of concern statutory provision being devoid of specific reasons.

(iii) For holding that the requisition/application dated 01.01.2024 to convene a meeting to consider the proposal of no confidence motion against the petitioner as well as the Up-Pramukh of Panchayat Samiti is absolutely in violation of Section 44 of the Panchayati Raj Act (hereinafter refer as Act only) and as such is illegal and unsustainable.

(iv) For issuance of any other appropriate writ, order or direction which your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was elected as a Pramukh from Sawant Gram Panchayat, Prakhand-Chhaurahi, District- Begusarai and after elected as Pramukh, the petitioner started discharging his duties as Pramukh in accordance with the mandate of law as well as statutory provisions. Some of the members of Panchayat Samiti having vested interest are hell bent to remove the petitioner from the post of Pramukh and accordingly, they conspired and sent a requisition dated 01.01.2024 purportedly signed by the members of Panchayat Samiti on vague and uncertain allegation in utter violation of Section 44 of Panchayat Raj Act. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that the private respondents and others submitted a vague application on 01.01.2024 requiring for convening a meeting of Panchayat Samiti but the requisition/application does not contain the charges or the allegation in explicit, unambiguous and clear terms. A letter bearing No. 05 dated 02.01.2024 was issued under the signature of the Block Development officer, Chhaurahi, Begusarai whereby the Respondent No. 7 issued a notice requiring for convening a meeting is i