ORDER :

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned notice passed by the third respondent vide his proceeding in Na.Ka.No.9012/2021/A7, dated 22.12.2021 and quash the same as illegal.

1. This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Certioari to call for the records relating to the notice issued by the third respondent in proceedings, dated 28.12.2021 and to set aside the same.

2. The petitioner, M. Uma Maheswari, had been elected as Chairperson of Gujiliamparai Panchayat Union, Dindigul District in 2019. The said Panchayat Union consists of 13 Ward Members. The Councilors had presented a complaint to the second respondent/District Collector, Dindigul, who in his proceedings, dated 03.12.2021, had recommended the third respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, Dindigul District, to initiate proceedings under Section 212 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994.

3. A show cause notice was issued by the third respondent on 04.12.2021. The petitioner filed W.P.(MD) No.22195 of 2021 and by order, dated 15.12.2021, the petitioner was permitted to peruse the documents in the office of the Panchayat in the presence of the second respondent/Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani. The petitioner then given a detailed explanation on 20.12.2021 requesting the third respondent to drop the proceedings initiated under Section 212 of Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. The petitioner then received a representation, dated 21.12.2021 by V. Seerangan to the first and second respondents seeking to initiate proceedings to disqualify the Councilor of Ward No.9 under Section 38(3)(c) and under Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act 1994.

4. The petitioner then sought to keep in abeyance the proceeding initiated under Section 212 of Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 till the completion of the aforementioned disqualification proceedings. However, the impugned notice was issued by the third respondent on 22.12.2021 calling for a meeting to be convened on 13.01.2022 and that the agenda related to No Confidence Motion against the petitioner herein. Questioning that notice, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

5. A counter affidavit had been filed by the respondents stating that the proceedings of No Confidence Motion were issued in adherence to the rules and provisions of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. It was stated that 11 Ward Members out of 13 Ward Members of the Panchayat Union Council had signed a notice proposing to move a No Confidence Motion against the petitioner and a copy of the statement of charges along with the motion had also been delivered on the petitioner, as required under Section 212 of the Act. The petitioner had submitted an explanation on 20.12.2021. However, the third respondent had decided to convene a meeting to place a No Confidence Motion for consideration on 13.01.2022 by proceedings, dated 22.12.2021. The said notice was issued under Section 212(7) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. It was stated that there was no illegality in the procedure adopted and that the Writ Petition should be dismissed and that there should a direction to convene the meeting and the agenda to be discussed.

6. Heard arguments advanced by Mr. C. Mayilvahana Rajendran, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Veerakathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents.

7. Mr. C. Mayilvahana Rajendran, learned Counsel for the petitioner primarily relied on Sub Section 2 of Section 212 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 and stated that there was a failure to comply with the requirements to serve a written statement of the charges in person to the Revenue Divisional Officer by any two of the Ward Members of the Panchayat Union Council, who signed the notice.

8. Section 212(2) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, is as follows :

“212.(1) .......

(2) Written notice of intention to make the motion, s