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

2017 Supreme(All) 1223

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
DILIP GUPTA AND JAYANT BANERJI, JJ.
PARVEEN SIDDIQUI - Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS - Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 41600 of 2017, decided on 6th November, 2017)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Subodh Kumar, Sudhir Dixit and Udit Chandra for the Petitioner; C.S.C. and Onkar Nath Mishra for the Respondents.

Headnote:U.P. Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961—Sections 15(3) and 237—Kshettra Panchayat—No-confidence motion—Non-compliance of Section 15(3) of 1961 Act—Effect and scope—Petitioner an elected Block Pramukh sought quashing of notice issued by Collector for calling a meeting of members—Requirement of giving notice by Collector under Section 15(3)(ii) in the prescribed proforma not necessary and proceedings will not be vitiated if there has been substantial compliance of provisions—All members of Kshettra Panchayat had due information that meeting of members of Kshettra Panchayat for motion expressing want of confidence in Block Pramukh would be held on 15.9.2017 at 10.30 a.m in office of Kshettra Panchayat—Except for petitioner, no other member has come forward to state that he had no information about meeting—Also needs to be noted that all 89 elected members of Kshettra Panchayat including petitioner participated in meeting—Plea of petitioner negatived—Respondents directed to declare result of voting. [Paras 15 to 35]

       Result; Petition Dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Dilip Gupta, J.—The petitioner, who is an elected Block Pramukh of Kshettra Panchayat Damkhoda in District Bareilly, has sought the quashing of the notice dated 30 August 2017 issued by the Collector, Bareilly under Section 15(3) of the U.P. Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 (the Act) for calling a meeting of the members of the Kshettra Panchayat on 15 September 2017 to consider the motion expressing want of confidence in the Block Pramukh.

2. It has been stated that since the said notice was sent by registered post by the Collector on 31 August 2017 and received by the petitioner on 1 September 2017, the provisions of Section 15(3)(ii) of the Act that require the Collector to give to the elected members of the Kshettra Panchayat notice of not less than fifteen-days of the meeting of Kshettra Panchayat to be held for consideration of the motion of no confidence on 15 September 2017, were not complied with as the date on which notice is despatched and the date on which the meeting is to be held have to be excluded. It has further been stated that the notice was not accompanied by a written notice of intention to make the motion of no confidence.

3. It is for this reason that when the matter was taken up by the Court on 14 September 2017, time was given to the learned Standing Counsel to seek instructions in the matter and it was further directed that the meeting scheduled to be held on 15 September 2017 could be held but the result of the meeting shall not be declared without the leave of the Court.

4. A short counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Collector, Bareilly, the District Panchayat Raj Officer (DPRO) and the Block Development Officer (BDO), Damkhoda who have been impleaded as respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 to the writ petition. A counter-affidavit was also filed on behalf of respondent No. 5 who had submitted the motion of no confidence before the Collector, Bareilly.

5. In the short counter-affidavit filed by the State respondents, it has been stated that there are 89 elected members of the Kshettra Panchayat Damkhoda. A notice dated 29 August 2017 in Form-1 signed by 65 members enclosing the proposed motion expressing want of confidence in the petitioner with their affidavits was submitted before the Collector on 29 August 2017. Thereupon, the Collector issued the notice dated 30 August 2017 convening a meeting of the members of the Kshettra Panchayat on 15 September 2017 at 10.30 a.m. in the office of Kshettra Panchayat for consideration of the motion of no confidence. The Collector by order dated 30 August 2017 directed the DPRO to serve the notice upon all the members of the Kshettra Panchayat by registered post. In compliance of the order passed by the Collector, the notice was sent by registered post on 31 August 2017 to all the members of the Kshettra Panchayat and was also served upon substantial members of the Kshettra Panchayat personally. A copy of the notice dated 30 August 2017 alongwith the written notice of intention to make the motion signed by 65 members of the Kshettra Panchayat was also pasted on the Notice Board of Block Damkhoda on 30 August 2017. It has also been stated that the Assistant Development Officer (Panchayat), Block Damkhoda (ADO (Panchayat), by a report dated 30 August 2017, informed that the direction to paste the notice on the Notice Board had been duly complied with. It has, therefore, been stated that all the 89 elected members of the Kshettra Panchayat, including the petitioner, had information about the meeting scheduled to take place on 15 September 2017 for consideration of the no confidence motion moved by 65 members of the Kshettra Panchayat Damkhoda against the petitioner. The short counter-affidavit further mentions that all the 89 members of the Kshettra Panchayat participated in the meeting and the voting that took place on 15 September 2017. The result has, however, not been declared in view of the order dated 14 September 2












































































































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top