This writ petition challenging a no confidence motion meeting scheduled against a Kshetra Panchayat Pramukh was dismissed as premature. The High Court held that since the District Magistrate directed the officer to act in accordance with law, immediate relief was not warranted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 32
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41407 of 2018
Petitioner :- Sunita Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Dayal Tiwari, M.D. Singh Shekhar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
This writ petitioner has been filed, interalia, for the following reliefs:-
"(i) To issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order of District Magistrate, Prayagraj (Allahabad) dated 01.12.2018 (Annexure No. 7 to the writ petition) by which the meeting of no confidence motion against the petitioner was scheduled to be held on 27.12.2018 on 11.00 AM at the Office of Kshetra Panchayat, Kaurihar along with notice issued in pursuance of the order dated 30.11.2018/01.12.2018 (Annexure No. 8 to the writ petition).
(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to held any meeting of no confidence against the petitioner in pursuance of the notice tabled before the District Magistrate dated 30.11.2018 (Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition)"
(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to exclude 47 members whose name had been mentioned in paragraph 9 of the writ petition along with the list of elected member of Kshettra Panchayat, Kaurihar. "
Brief facts of the case as narrated by the learned counsel for the petitioner are as follows:
The petitioner was elected as Pramukh of Kshetra Panchayat, Kaurihar, District Prayagraj (Allahabad) in the year 2016 and since then she is discharging her duty as Pramukh, Kshetra Panchayat, Kaurihar without any complain. There
are total 197 elected members of Kshettra Panchayat, Kaurihar and out of them 127 members delivered the notice along with the copy of proposed no confidence motion on 30.11.2018 to the District Magistrate, Prayagraj (Allahabad) for convening a meeting for consideration of no confidence motion. The District Magistrate, Prayagraj has passed the order dated 01.12.2018, convening a meeting for consideration of no confidence motion against the petitioner on 27.12.2018. The petitioner filed an application on 01.12.2018 stating therein that a new Block in the name and style of Shringverpur Dham has already been constituted through notification dated 18.01.2018 by separating some Gram Panchayats from the territory of Kshetra Panchayat, kaurihar. According to the petitioner, 37 villages/Gram Panchayats, which had elected 47 members, now do not form the part of Kshetra Panchayat, Kaurihar, as such have no right to participate in the motion of no confidence. In pursuance of the aforesaid application dated 01.12.2018, the District Magistrate, Prayagraj passed an order on 02.12.2018 directing the District Panchayat Raj Officer (D.P.R.O), Prayagraj to act in accordance with law/Rules.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the District Magistrate, Prayagraj has not specifically passed the order directing the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Prayagraj not to allow such members to participate in no confidence motion and vote as they no longer the members of the Kshetra Panchayat, Kaurihar.
Heard Sri M.D. Singh Shekhar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri R.D. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing
Counsel appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.
Bare perusal of the record shows that the District Magistrate, Prayagraj has not rejected the application of the petitioner but very rightly has directed the District Panchayat Raj Officer (D.P.R.O), Prayagraj to act in accordance with law/Rules. It appears that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition merely on the apprehension that the District Panchayat Raj Officer/SDM will not act in accordance with law/Rules. Thus, the present writ petition is premature and no relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition at this stage. We hope and trust that the S.D.M. will act in accordance with law while presiding at the meeting convened for considering no confidence motion against the petitioner. No other argument was raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
In view of the above, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order dated 01.12.2018/02.12.2018 passed by the respondent no. 2- District Magistrate, Prayagraj.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed at this stage.
However, it is open for the petitioner to challenge the proceedings of no confidence motion, if not carried on in accordance with Rules.
Order Date :- 14.12.2018 Arun
Sunita Devi
State of U.P.
4 Others
Shashi Kant Gupta
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
