Back
SANJAY KUMAR, M. V. MURALIDARAN
P. Nengkhanchin – Appellant
Versus
State of Manipur – Respondent
ORDER
1. The unsuccessful petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos. 222 and 251 of 2021 are in appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 03.09.2021 passed by a learned Judge of this Court, dismissing both the writ petitions.
2. The provisions of the Manipur Village Authorities in Hill Areas Act, 1956 (for brevity, 'the Act of 1956'), fell for consideration in these cases. Broadly, the question that arose was whether the provisions of the Act of 1956 authorize removal of the elected Chairman and the Secretary of a Village Authority from such posts, by way of a resolution passed by the other members of the Village Authority. Steps having been taken by members of the Vengnuam South Village Authority to remove the elected Chairman and the Secretary, viz., respondents No. 4 and 5 in these appeals, this question came into focus. The Government of Manipur however issued a clarification, vide letter dated 24.02.2021, that the Act of 1956 did not provide for replacement of the members of the Village Authority and that such members were not to be removed other than under Section 8 of the Act of 1956. The Government further stated that the Vengnuam South Village Authority would remain functional under the
The Act of 1956 does not provide for the removal of an elected Chairman or Secretary from office, and the proper course, as per the statute, is for the other members of the Village Authority to remov....
The Act, 1956 did not provide a specific procedure for the removal of the Chairman, highlighting the need for legislative amendment to incorporate a provision for the removal of the Chairman in the A....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the replacement of a selected Village Council Member must be based on statutory grounds and due process, as provided in the Nagaland Village C....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Village Council to choose a Chairman as per Section 7(1) of the Nagaland Village Councils Act, 1978, and the impact of the ....
The Court established that removal from office must be preceded by a show cause notice and an opportunity to defend, aligning with principles of natural justice.
Passing illegal resolution to divest Sarpanch of signing authority despite statutory bar and caution, and deferring welfare funds thereby, constitutes willful misconduct warranting removal of Up-Sarp....
Removal of an elected Councillor requires specific allegations and adherence to natural justice principles, as a failure to provide a proper notice vitiates the removal order.
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
