The intervention of the Anchalik Panchayat in the meeting process was unauthorized and the procedure for deciding the no-confidence motion was not followed, rendering the proceedings and resolutions invalid.

Amitava Roy, J.

1. The subject matter of this appeal is the process relating to a meeting under the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (as amended) in which a no confidence motion against the appellant, the President of the Nitainagar Gaon Panchayat, District Hailakandi (hereafter referred to as the Gaon Panchayat/Panchayat) had been passed on 12.3.209. By the common judgment and order dated 30.3.2009 passed in WP(C) 1008/2009 and WP(C) 1086/2009 preferred by the writ appellant herein, the challenge to the legality and/or validity of the said exercise has been negated in essence on the ground that the alleged departures from the prescriptions of procedure laid down in Section 15of the Act which are essentially directory in nature do not per se vitiate the same.

2. At the admission of the appeal, a reference to the decision of a Division Bench of this Court rendered in Mumtaz Rana Laskar and Ors. v. State of Assam and Ors. 2006 (1) GLT 46, to this effect having been made, by the order dated 15.5.2009, this appeal has been placed before this Bench inter alia to consider the correctness of the view expressed therein.

3. We have heard Dr. B. Ahmed, Learned Counsel for the appellant, Ms. B. Goel, learned State Counsel, for the official respondents and Mr. P.K. Deka, Learned Counsel for the respondents 7 to 14.

4. The factual background in short deserves recital. At all relevant times, the writ appellant was the elected President of the Panchayat located within the territorial limits of the Hailakandi Anchalik Panchayat ('the Anchalik Panchayat') in the District of Hailakandi. There are 10 directly elected members of the Panchayat and the office of the Vice President thereof following the resignation of its incumbent is for the time being vacant.

5. On 19.2.2009, eight of such members submitted a written requisition with the Secretary of the Panchayat for convening a meeting to discuss the issue of "no confidence" against the President i.e., the writ appellant. The Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat, as required under Section 15 of the Act issued a notice dated 4.3.2009 convening a meeting to that effect on 6.3.2009. As scheduled, the meeting started on 11 A.M. on 6.3.2009 in presence of all the members of the Gaon Panchayat in its office premises. In course of the proceedings, however, the meeting was cancelled by the secretary of the Gaon Panchayat on the instructions of the President and the secretary of the Anchalik Panchayat and to that effect, he (Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat) also issued a notice on the same date, i.e., 6.3.2009. In course of the day, the secretary cum Executive Officer, Hailakandi Anchalik Panchayat issued another notice addressed to the President of the Gaon Panchayat, its Secretary and Members informing them that as directed by the President of the Hailakandi Anchalik Panchayat, a meeting to discuss the "no-confidence motion" against the appellant had been convened on 12.3.2009 at 11 A.M. Perceiving that the cancellation of the meeting originally convened on 6.3.2009, at the intervention of the President and the secretary of the Hailakandi Anchalik Panchayat, and the proposal to hold another on the same issue on 12.3.2009 by the Anchalik Panchayat was in transgression of the letter and spirit of Section 15 of the Act, the writ appellant instituted WP(C) 1008/2008 seeking annulment of these two notices. By order dated 9.3.2009 passed therein, this Court while issuing a notice of motion recorded the following operative directions:

Considering the matter in its entirety and in the interest of justice, while the election of Nitainagar Gaon Panchayat, schedule to be held, on 12.3.2009, on the subject of "No Confident Motion" against the petitioner, may be allowed as scheduled, the result of the "No Confidence Motion" shall not, without leave of this Court, be acted upon until 18.3.2009, when the prayer for interim directions, made in this writ petition, will be taken up for consideration.

6. Thus the meeting as schedul