Back
SANDEEP N. BHATT
Anitaben Pravinbhai Solanki – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner has mainly challenged the no confidence motion passed on 08.07.2022.
2. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
3.1 Mr. Naman Brahmbhatt, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a lady, elected as a member of the Panchayat and declared as Sarpanch on 21.12.2021 unanimously by all the elected members. He has further submitted that the charge is taken by the petitioner on 19.01.2022 and the impugned communication is moved by the members of the panchayat on 30.06.2022.
3.2 He has submitted that within a period of six months, no confidence motion against the Sarpanch – petitioner is moved by referring the provisions of Section 55 and 56 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993.
3.3 He has heavily relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Shivangiben Chetankumar Patel Versus State of Gujarat reported in 2018 (2) GLH 523, more particularly Para : 39 thereof and has submitted that such no confidence motion could be proposed within a span of one year irrespective of allegations against the Sarpanch.
3.4 He has submitted that this petition may be allowed.
4.1 Mr. Munshaw, learned advocate for respondents no.2 and 3 – Pan
The court's decision was based on the finding that the petitioner had misused powers and authorities given to the local body, and there was no reason to interfere in the impugned motion of no confide....
Previous no-confidence motions must be rejected on merits to bar future motions under Chhattisgarh law.
If Sarapnach fails to call such meeting, the Secretary of the panchayat shall forthwith make a report thereof the competent authority and thereupon the competent authority shall call a meeting of the....
The importance of adhering to procedural requirements for no confidence motions, the significance of majority opinion, and the discretionary powers of the court in such matters.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of ratification in the Gram Sabha for a no confidence motion passed against a directly elected Sarpanch, as per the amended provision....
No Confidence Motion has been passed with regular procedure as contemplated under the Act and passed as per the requirement of law in which the petitioner participated throughout, the resolution pass....
The legitimacy of a no-confidence motion is upheld unless proven procedurally flawed to the extent of causing substantial prejudice.
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
