Back
SANDEEP MEHTA, MITALI THAKURIA
Harmila Begum W/o Nazrul Hoque – Appellant
Versus
Ruhul Amin S/o Late Eklasur Rahman – Respondent
What is the meaning of the word "lost" in the second proviso to section 15(1) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 as interpreted by the court? What are the procedural requirements under Section 15(1) and Section 17(3) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 for convening and subsequent actions on a no-confidence motion? What is the court’s ruling on whether a no-confidence motion can be re-convened after a finding of procedural defect and the six-month bar in the second proviso to Section 15(1)?
Key Points: - The judgment clarifies that "lost" should be interpreted in text and context, indicating a motion may be defeated on merits or due to substantive reasons, not merely due to procedural defects (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The court held that procedural defects do not automatically cause a no-confidence motion to be lost, and interference on such grounds does not bar fresh action within six months unless proven on merits or caused by deliberate abandonment (!) (!) (!) . - Because the no-confidence motion against the appellant was quashed for procedural reasons, the court directed a fresh meeting to be convened after complying with Section 15 requirements, and dismissed the appeals as lacking merit (!) (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP MEHTA, J.
1. These two appeals take an exception to the judgment & final order dated 07.02.2023 rendered by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No. 6971/2022 (Ruhul Amin vs. State of Assam and Others), whereby the writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India preferred by the writ petitioner (appellant in Writ Appeal No. 72/2023), was accepted.
2. The appellant in Writ Appeal No. 72/2023, namely, Ruhul Amin, is the elected President of Anipur Gaon Panchayat. The appellants in the connected Writ Appeal No. 106/2023 are the 9 (nine) Ward Members (respondent Nos.8 to 16 in the writ petition), who introduced a no-confidence motion against the appellant in Writ Appeal No. 72/2023, who is the elected President of the said Gaon Panchayat. It is the claim of the appellant Ruhul Amin that he was assaulted and was hospitalized from 23.09.2022 to 1.10.2022 and thus, no steps pursuant to receiving the requisition notice under Section 15(1) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as “1994 Act”) dated 26.09.2022 could be taken. Thereafter, the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat referred the matter to the Anchalik Panchayat in accordance with the provi
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
