THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Salim Uddin Laskar S/o. Ansar Uddin Laskar – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Represented By The Commissioner And Secretary To The Govt. Of Assam and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) no. 7986 Of 2022
Decided On : 09-03-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 - Section 6[1][b], [3], 15, [1], 17[3] - Motion of no confidence - Removing him from office of President - Petition assailing proceedings, initiated originally by a requisition notice submitted by 9 [nine] nos. of Ward Members of Panchayat - Prayed to direct respondent authorities to allow petitioner to continue as President, Panchayat – Held, It is clear that 7 [seven] days time period prescribed in Section 15[1] of Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 for President of the Jurisdictional Anchalik Panchayat to convene special meeting after matter is referred by Secretary of Gaon Panchayat is not mandatory but is directory in nature - Time gap of 12 [twelve] days, as projected by petitioner, between date of notice and date of holding of special meeting has not caused any kind of prejudice to petitioner and non-adherence to time-frame prescribed in Section 15[1] cannot be held to have vitiated proceedings of special meeting held and resolution adopted - On being counted, 9 [nine] nos. of Ward Members were found to have cast their votes in favour of motion, meaning thereby, motion of no confidence brought against petitioner as President of Borbond Gaon Panchayat was passed by the majority of two-third of total number of Ward Members of Borbond Gaon Panchayat – Court is of view that petition is bereft of any merit - Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
1. The writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been instituted by the petitioner primarily assailing the proceedings, initiated originally by a requisition notice dated 05.09.2022 submitted by 9 [nine] nos. of Ward Members of Borbond Gaon Panchayat, District – Hailakandi, in its entirely, which proceedings had ultimately culminated in a special meeting held, on 29.11.2022, in the office of the Lala Anchalik Panchayat with the passing of a motion of no confidence against the petitioner. In the special meeting held on 29.11.2022, the alleged motion of no confidence initiated against the petitioner for the purpose of removing him from the office of the President, Borbond Gaon Panchayat was stated to have been passed with more than two-third majority since 9 [nine] nos. of Ward Members of Borbond Gaon Panchayat, out of the total 10 [ten] Ward Members, voted against the petitioner in the process of secret ballots. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to continue as the President, Borbond Gaon Panchayat.
2. The background events which have led the petitioner to institute the writ petition can be, briefly, narrated as follows :-
2.1. In the General Panchayat Election held in the year 2018, the petitioner submitted his nomination for the post of President, Borbond Gaon Panchayat. In the General Panchayat Election so held, the petitioner got elected directly to the post of President, Borbond Gaon Panchayat [hereinafter also referred to as ‘the Gaon Panchayat’, at places] as per the provisions of Section 6[1][b] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994. In the said General Panchayat Election, the respondent nos. 8 – 16 got themselves elected as Ward Members of Borbond Gaon Panchayat. Apart from the directly elected President, Borbond Gaon Panchayat is consisted of 10 [ten] nos. of Ward Members. After constitution of the Gaon Panchayat, the first meeting of the Gaon Panchayat was called in terms of the provision contained in Section 6[3] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 inter alia for election of the Vice-President of the Gaon Panchayat. The post of the Vice-President, Borbond Gaon Panchayat was reserved for Scheduled Caste [Woman] category. No Vice-President could be elected in the first meeting as after declaration of results of the General Panchayat Election, no candidate from Scheduled Caste [Woman] category got elected. As a result, the post of Vice-President, Borbond Gaon Panchayat had remained unfilled.
2.2. A requisition notice under the seals and signatures of 9 [nine] nos. of Ward Members, Borbond Gaon Panchayat i.e. the respondent nos. 8 – 16 as requisitionists, came to be submitted on 05.09.2022 to the Secretary, Borbond Gaon Panchayat [the respondent no. 7]. It is not in dispute that the respondent no. 7 on receipt of the requisition notice dated 05.09.2022, placed the same before the petitioner through an office file on the same date [05.09.2022] seeking the petitioner’s approval to convene a special meeting in terms of the provisions of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 to discuss the motion of no confidence brought against the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner had accorded his approval to convene the special meeting on 19.09.2022 to discuss the motion of no confidence brought against him. Upon receipt of the approval, the respondent no. 7 issued notices to all the stakeholders including the Ward Members, Borbond Gaon Panchayat conveying that the special meeting to discuss the motion of no confidence would be held at 11-00 a.m. on 19.09.2022 at the office of the Borbond Gaon Panchayat.
2.3. With the contention that there was no elected Vice-President of Borbond Gaon Panchayat to preside over a special meeting to discuss a motion of no confidence brought against the President of the Gaon Panchayat in conformity with Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, the petitioner had, i
Mumtaz Rana Laskar and others vs. State of Assam and others
Habibur Rahman vs. State of Assam and others
Mosira Bibi vs. State of Assam and others
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....
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.
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....
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 ....
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 : Process subsequent to requisition notices expressing want of confidence had failed finally either on technical grounds or due to procedural irregularities, this Court, thus, is of the ....
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.