Back
PARTH PRATEEM SAHU
Fuleshwari Mahesh W/o Narayan Mahesh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department – Respondent
ORDER :
Parth Prateem Sahu, J.
1.By way of this petition, petitioner has questioned the legality and sustainability of the order dated 22.08.2022, passed by Additional Commissioner/respondent No.2 in Revision Case No. 29-A-89/2021-22, whereby respondent No.2 dismissed the revision filed by petitioners challenging the order dated 16.02.2022 allowing the reference filed by respondent No.7 against the proceedings of no confidence motion carried out against her.
2.Facts relevant for disposal of this petition are that respondent No.7 was elected Sarpanch of Village Panchayat, Hardi, Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh. Mentioning the reasons, a notice was submitted before the Prescribed Authority signed by 13 Panchas including the petitioners out of 17 panchas requesting for bringing no confidence motion against Sarpanch (respondent No.7). After receipt of notice submitted by elected panchas, the Prescribed Authority had proceeded with the same and issued notice for holding no confidence motion on 20.07.2021 fixing date, time and place of meeting. The meeting was scheduled on 31.07.2021. Presiding Officer was appointed and on the scheduled date, no confidence motion was convened. In the proceedings
The court ruled that proper notice for a no-confidence motion was served, and the Collector's decision to set it aside was erroneous, affirming the motion's validity.
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.
The failure to furnish a copy of the requisition for a no-confidence motion does not invalidate the motion if it is adopted by the requisite majority, as the requirement is directory, not mandatory.
Procedural safeguards under Section 24 of the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act are mandatory for no-confidence motions; late notice receipt does not invalidate proceedings absent demonstrable prejudice.
The court ruled that compliance with procedural safeguards under the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act, 1964 is critical for no-confidence motions, affirming that minor deviations do not invalidate democrati....
The court established that the personal delivery requirement in Section 15(2) is directory, allowing for valid notice delivery to an alternate official.
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 safeguards under Section 24 of the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act is crucial, but minor deviations that do not demonstrate prejudice may not invalidate no-confidence proceedings....
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
