IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
NIBHA PATHAK W/O BINOD PATHAK – Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 3661 of 2022
Decided On : 06-12-2022
Constitution of India, 1949 – Article 226 – Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 – Section 15 – Power of High Court to issue certain writs – Meeting of Non-confidence – Learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N.K. Dev Nath, Learned counsel for respondents authorities Government of Assam heard learned Senior Government Advocate for respondents respectively being Deputy Commissioner Block Development Officer Development Block learned counsel for private respondents members – Held, Court would have to consider inter-alia nature and design of statute and consequence which would follow from construing it one way or other now construe that of more than two months taken by Deputy Commissioner instead of seven days as prescribed would have its own consequence or not – Court will have to also give a thought of delay of beyond two months, instead of doing it within seven days – Position of respective parties President members may have also been subjected to a change which may have a bearing on consequence of outcome – Writ Petition stands disposed.
JUDGMENT :
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.
1. Heard Ms. S.B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N.K. Dev Nath, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 4, being the authorities under the P&RD of the Government of Assam. Also heard Mr. H. Sarma, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate for the respondents No. 5 and 10, respectively being the Deputy Commissioner, Barpeta and the Block Development Officer, Bhawanipur Development Block and Mr. M. Sarania, learned counsel for the private respondents No. 6 to 9 being the members of the No. 9 Pub Paka Gaon Panchayat.
2. The petitioner is the President of No. 9 Pub Paka Gaon Panchayat under the Bhawanipur Anchalik Panchayat. Eight members of the said Gaon Panchayat made a requisition for a special meeting of No-Confidence on 24.01.2022 under Section 15(1) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (for short ‘the Act of 1994’). A stand is taken that subsequently two of the members out of the eight who had given requisition for the special meeting had withdrawn as per the letter dated 21.03.2022. Be that as it may, as the petitioner President did not approve the convening of the said special meeting for No-Confidence, the Secretary of the No. 9 Pub Paka Gaon Panchayat by his communication dated 08.02.2022 requested the President of the Barpeta Anchalik Panchayat to convene the meeting.
3. Accordingly, the President of Barpeta Anchalik Panchayat by the letter dated 09.02.2022 made to the President of No. 9 Pub Paka Gaon Panchayat and its Vice President and other members informed that the special meeting for No- Confidence had been fixed on 14.02.2022. By another communication dated 11.02.2022, the Executive Officer, Barpeta Anchalik Panchayat made to the Executive Officer, Bhawanipur Anchalik Panchayat informed that in the meantime, the No. 9 Pub Paka Gaon Panchayat had been transferred to be under the Bhawanipur Anchalik Panchayat and accordingly, requested that appropriate steps be taken for convening the special meeting for No-Confidence inasmuch as, the Barpeta Anchalik Panchayat would be unable to hold the meeting on 14.02.2022 as fixed earlier.
4. Because of the aforesaid circumstance as the special meeting for No- Confidence could not be held, the Secretary of No. 9 Pub Paka Gaon Panchayat by his communication dated 21.02.2022 informed the Deputy Commissioner, Bajali, of the requirement to hold the special meeting for No-Confidence. By another communication dated 24.02.2022, the Executive Officer, Bhawanipur Anchalik Panchayat also made a request to the Deputy Commissioner, Bajali, that as the special meeting for No-Confidence could not be held by the Barpeta Anchalik Panchayat on 14.02.2022 because of change of administrative jurisdiction of the Gaon Panchayat, therefore necessary action be taken. In response thereof, the Deputy Commissioner, Bajali by his order dated 22.04.2022 had convened and fixed the special meeting for No-Confidence on 28.04.2022. In the meeting held on 28.04.2022, a resolution was taken whereby the petitioner President was removed from office where seven members voted in favour of the removal and three in favour of the petitioner President. Being aggrieved the present writ petition is instituted.
5. One of the grounds urged upon by Ms. S.B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner is that under Section 15(1) of the Act of 1994, the Deputy Commissioner/ Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) shall convene the meeting within seven days from the date of receipt of information from the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat that the President of the Anchalik Panchayat had failed to convene the special meeting for No-Confidence. Accordingly, it is contended that the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat had informed the Deputy Commissioner, Bajali about the inability of the President of the Anchalik Panchayat to convene the meeting by the communication dated 21.02.2022 which again was fortified by another communication dated 24.02.2022 from the Executive Officer, Bhawan
Aleya Khatun and Others vs. State of Assam and Others
Basanti Das vs. State of Assam and Others
Section 15 of Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 have been held to be directory and not mandatory, any resolution adopted cannot be faulted with merely because time limit prescribed under Section 15(1) have n....
Failure to convene a meeting for a no confidence motion against the Vice President in violation of Section 15(1) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994.
Word ‘lost’ appearing in 2nd proviso to section 15(1), in deference to fundamental principles of statutory interpretation, has to be essentially comprehended in text and context in which it appears.
Point of Law : Section 17 [3] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 has clearly stipulated that in case of any special meeting [which is a meeting for no confidence motion], 3 [three] days' clear notice h....
Section 15(2) of Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 which provides for giving notice to President for purpose of holding a No Confidence Motion is mandatory and non compliance of such mandatory provision and ....
In a judicial proceeding any interference of an order which a person may be beneficiary of cannot be initiated and concluded without issuing notice to person who is beneficiary.
The Notice for the special meeting was found to be in violation of the statutory prescription of 3 clear days' notice as per Section 17[3] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994.
“A mandatory provision of law requires strict compliance but there are situations where even if a provision is mandatory, non-compliance would not result in nullification of act, such as when a certa....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.