Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K.PATTANAIK
Pratima Patra – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding disqualification and procedural adherence (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's reasoning on the lack of rules and validity of proceedings (Para 7 , 10) |
| 4. conclusion and order of the court (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
ORDER :
1. Heard Mr. Dalai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party Nos.6 to 15 and Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State.
3. Mr. Dalai, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire exercise is vitiated since no rules of procedure is in place as is required in terms of Section 24(2) of the Orissa Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The submission is that conduct of business dealing with meeting in terms of Section 24(1) of the Act requires a procedure, which is not prescribed and therefore, the exercise for the motion is to fall flat. It is further submitted that some of the Ward Members stand disqualified under Section 25(2)(b) of the Act and therefore, the requisition received by opposite party No.4 is not a valid one, hence, it could not have been acted upon for the no confidence motion. Furthermore, opposite
A no-confidence motion can proceed in the absence of prescribed procedural rules unless formally challenged. Disqualifications must be established through due process before they impede participation....
Procedural compliance under Section 24 of the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act is mandatory; deviations may invalidate proceedings. The court confirmed that the notice for No Confidence Motion adhered to st....
The court confirmed that the notice for a No Confidence Motion must comply with statutory requirements; however, procedural safeguards do not invalidate proceedings if legislative intent is met.
Compliance with procedural safeguards under Section 24 of the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act is crucial, but minor deviations that do not demonstrate prejudice may not invalidate no-confidence proceedings....
The court ruled that compliance with procedural safeguards under the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act, 1964 is critical for no-confidence motions, affirming that minor deviations do not invalidate democrati....
Procedural safeguards under Section 24 of the Odisha Gram Panchayat Act are mandatory for no-confidence motions; late notice receipt does not invalidate proceedings absent demonstrable prejudice.
Fifteen days notice for a no confidence motion is mandatory under Section 24(2)(c), but mode of service is directory; lack of prejudice can validate proceedings even if procedural irregularities exis....
The issuance of a notice for a no confidence motion must comply with statutory requirements, including accompanying resolutions; failure to show prejudice does not invalidate the process.
A no-confidence motion against a municipal Vice-Chairperson is valid without the necessity of specific reasons in the resolution, and adherence to statutory notice requirements fulfills procedural ju....
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
