SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(All) 2025

B.S.CHAUHAN, D.P.GUPTA
CHHATRAPAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ravi Kant, Suvarna Singh, VIJENDRA SINGH

B. S. CHAUHAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned notice dated 3. 9. 2003 (Annexure-4), issued by the respondent No. 2, to convene the meeting for considering no-confidence motion against the petitioner on 22. 9. 2003.

( 2 ) THE facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was elected on 8. 3. 2001, as a Kshettra Pramukh of Block, Hasiyan, District Mahamaya Nagar. Members, more than required for the purpose of the said Kshetra Panchayat gave notice to the District Collector (Respondent No. 2) of no-confidence motion against the petitioner on 30. 6. 2003. The notice was issuing to all the members for holding the meeting on 21. 7. 2003. However, for some reason the meeting was not held and has been scheduled to be held on 22. 9. 2003, which is being challenged on the ground that it was mandatory for the Respondent No. 2 to hold the meeting within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice, i. e. , from 30. 6. 2003, and as the notice has lapsed, the meeting for no-confidence motion cannot be held under the provisions of U. P. Kshettra panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Adhiniyam, 1961



































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top