Allowed

Shrimati Sangeeta v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC12 Jul 2023WPC/1357/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses two writ petitions concerning a no-confidence motion against a Sarpanch under the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Act. The High Court set aside an interim stay order passed by the Commissioner that halted the proceedings of the no-confidence motion, holding that once the motion is passed, the elected official ceases office automatically.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 09.11.2021 granting stay of no-confidence motion proceedings set aside; proceedings to be concluded within 3 months.

Shrimati Sangeeta Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 4848 of 2021

¶5

Narayan Singh S/o Mandev Singh Aged About 42 Years Panch, R/o Ward No. 1, Village Chirguda, Post Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Administration, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Commissioner Ambikapur, Division Surguja, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Collector Koriya, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

Smt. Sangeeta W/o Shri Lal Bahadul Singh Aged About 32 Years Ex. Sarpanch, R/o Village Kochila, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

Smt. Kalawati W/o Shri Basant Rajwade Aged About 26 Years Panch, Ward No. 03 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

Krishna Kumar S/o Brij Bihari Aged About 25 Years Panch, Ward No. 02 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

Ramratan Singh S/o Jitan Singh Aged About 39 Years Panch, Ward No. 04 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

Smt. Sangeeta Singh W/o Shri Ramratan Singh Aged About 35 Years Panch, Ward No. 05 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶16

Smt. Dev Kumari W/o Shri Purshottam Singh Aged About 38 Years Panch, Ward No. 06 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶17

10.Smt. Priti Singh W/o Shri Anil Singh Aged About 26 Years Panch, Ward No. 07 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶18

Smt. Pratibha Khande W/o Shri Sumit Khande Aged About 25 Years Panch, Ward No. 08 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat

¶19

-2-

¶20

Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶21

12.Smt. Sharda Rajwade W/o Shri Nateshwar Rajwade Aged About 24 Years Panch, Ward No. 09 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶22

13.Smt. Kanti Rajwade W/o Shri Jailal Rajwade Aged About 27 Years Panch, Ward No. 09 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶23

14.Nandkeshwar S/o Maduk Rajwade Aged About 45 Years Panch, Ward No. 11 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.,

¶24

15.Smt. Kaushilya Singh W/o Shri Sukul Singh Aged About 26 Years Panch, Ward No. 12 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶25

16.Smt. Archana W/o Kartik Aged About 25 Years Panch, Ward No. 13 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶26

17.Triloki S/o Rajman Aged About 32 Years Panch, Ward No. 14 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh

¶27

18.Mahesh Singh S/o Umashankar Aged About 31 Years Panch, Ward No. 15 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.,

¶28

19.Smt. Suman Kurrey W/o Sanjay Sonwani Aged About 27 Years Panch, Ward No. 16 Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶29

20.Secretary Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Janpad Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.,

¶30

21.Nayab Tehsildar Patna Baikunthpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

¶31

22.Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents

And

WPC No. 1357 of 2022

Shrimati Sangeeta W/o Lal Bahadur Singh Aged About 34 Years Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattigarh R/o Village Kochila, Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

-3-

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶40

Commissioner Sarguja, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

¶41

Collector Korea, Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶42

Sub Divisional Officer (R) Baikunthpur, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶43

Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat Korea, Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh.

¶44

Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Korea, Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶45

Secretary Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh.

¶46

Narayan Singh S/o Mandev Singh Aged About 42 Years Panch, Ward No. 1, R/o Village Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶47

Srimati Kalawati W/o Basant Rajwade Aged About 26 Years Panch, Ward No. 3, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶48

10.Krishna Kumar S/o Brij Bihari Aged About 25 Years Panch, Ward No. 2, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶49

Ramratan Singh S/o Jitan Singh Aged About 39 Years Panch, Ward No. 4, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶50

12.Sangeeta Singh W/o Ramratan Singh Aged About 35 Years Panch, Ward No. 5, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶51

13.Shrimati Dev Kumari W/o Purushottam Singh Aged About 38 Years Panch, Ward No. 6, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶52

14.Shrimati Priti Singh W/o Anil Singh Aged About 26 Years Panch, Ward No. 7, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶53

15.Shrimati Pratima Khande W/o Shri Sumit Khande Aged About 25 Years Panch, Ward No. 8, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶54

-4-

¶55

16.Shrimati Sharda Rajwade W/o Nateshwar Rajwade Aged About 24 Years Panch, Ward No. 9, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶56

17.Shrimari Kanti Rajwade W/o Jailal Rajwade Aged About 27 Years Panch, Ward No. 10, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶57

18.Nandkeshwar S/o Maduk Rajwade Aged About 45 Years Panch, Ward No. 11, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶58

19.Shrimati Kaushilya Singh W/o Sukul Singh Aged About 26 Years Panch, Ward No. 12, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶59

20.Shrimati Archana W/o Kartik Aged About 25 Years Panch, Ward No. 13, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶60

21.Triloki S/o Rajman Aged About 32 Years Panch, Ward No. 14, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶61

22.Mahesh Singh S/o Umashankar Aged About 31 Years, Panch Ward No.15, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶62

23.Shrimati Suman Kurrey W/o Sanjay Sonwani Aged About 27 Years Panch, Ward No. 16, R/o Gram Panchayat Chirguda, Tehsil Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh.

¶63

---- Respondents

¶64

¶65

In WPC No. 4848 of 2021

¶66

For Petitioner	:Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate
For State	: Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer
For Respondent No.4	: Mr. Mahendra Dubey, Advocate

¶67

______________________________________________________________ In WPC No. 1357 of 2022 For Petitioner : Mr. Mahendra Dubey, Advocate For State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer

¶68

-5-

¶69

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

Order On Board

12/07/2023

WPC No. 4848 of 2021

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

¶74

“ 10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly call for the entire record pertinent to case of petitioners.

¶75

10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass appropriate nature of writ and set-aside the order dated 09.11.2021 (Annexure P1) passed by respondent no.2 as without jurisdiction and contrary to provisions of law, in the fact and circumstances of the case.

¶76

10.3. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass appropriate nature of writ and set-aside the memo of revision dated 8.11.2021 (Annexure P/8) in revenue proceeding No.jk-iq-iz-dz - 202109010100004/ 89/2020-21 as not maintainable under the law and contrary to provisions of CG Panchayat Raj Act, in the fact and circumstances of the case. ”

¶77

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner appearing in WPC No.4848 of 2021 submits that in view of the decision in the case of Smt. Hemlata Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (WPC No.2313 of 2019 decided on 19.09.2019), he is not pressing relief “10.3” and restricts his submission with respect to

¶78

-6-

¶79

relief “10.2”.

¶80

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is an elected Up-Sarpanch of Village- Chirguda, District- Koriya and respondent No.4 was elected Sarpanch. Out of 16 elected Panchas including Sarpach and Up-Sarpanch, 11 Panchas submitted an application before the prescribed authority for bringing 'No Confidence Motion' against respondent No.4. The prescribed authority after recording his satisfaction appointed Presiding Officer, fixed the date and place of meeting and also issued notice to all the Panchas for Meeting of 'No Confidence Motion' on 13.09.2021. On the date fixed for meeting, motion against respondent No.4 was carried out. Against the motion of 'No Confidence' carried out against respondent No.4, she preferred reference under Section 21 (4) of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short “the Act of 1993 ”) . Reference submitted by the petitioner before respondent No.3 came to be dismissed against which respondent No.4 preferred revision before the Commissioner, Sarguja Division Ambikapur along with an application for interim relief. Commissioner, without considering the nature of proceedings, provision under Section 21 of the Act of 1993 and Rules framed thereunder has erroneously passed interim order staying the effect and operation of order dated 28.10.2021 and the proceedings of 'No Confidence Motion' dated 13.09.2021 for a period of 90 days.

¶81

It is contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that once the “No Confidence Motion” is carried out, nothing remains for

¶82

-7-

¶83

the authority to stay the effect of operation of carrying of “No Confidence Motion” and therefore, order (Annexure P1) is bad in law. In support of his contention, he placed reliance upon the decision in the case of Chetan Kurre and Ors. Vs. State of CG and Ors. (WPC No.1390 of 2016 and connected matters, decided on 07.04.2017).

¶84

Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State supports the order impugned .

¶85

Mr. Mahendra Dubey, counsel for the respondent No,.4 also supports the order and submits that the petition can be disposed of directing respondent No.2/Commissioner to conclude the proceedings at the earliest.

¶86

I have learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed along with writ petition.

¶87

Perusal of Annexure P-1 would show that the Commissioner while entertaining the revision filed by respondent No.4 challenging the order dated 28.10.2021 passed by the Collector in proceedings under Section 21 (4) of the Act of 1993, considering the application for grant of interim relief, has passed the order of status quo of the effect of order of proposal of 'No Confidence Motion' dated 13.09.2021 as also order of Collector dated 28.10.2021 for a period of 90 days.

¶88

Provision under Section 21 of the Act of 1993 talks of 'No Confidence Motion' against Sarpanch and Up-Sarpanch which is extracted as below:-

¶89

“ 21. No-confidence motion against Sarpanch

¶90

-8-

¶91

and Up-Sarpanch . - (1) On a motion of noconfidence being passed by the Gram Panchayat by a resolution passed by majority of not less than three fourth of Panchas present and voting and such majority is more than two third of the total number of Panchas constituting the Gram Panchayat for the time being, the Sarpanch or Up -Sarpanch against whom such motion is passed, shall cease to hold office forthwith.

¶92

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or the rules made thereunder a Sarpanch or an Up-Sarpanch shall not preside over a meeting in which a motion of no-confidence is discussed against him. Such meeting shall be convened in such manner as may be prescribed and shall be presided over by an officer of the Government as the Prescribed Authority may appoint. The Sarpanch or the Up-Sarpanch, as the case may be, shall have a right to speak at, or otherwise to take part in, the proceeding of the meeting.

¶93

(3) No-confidence motion shall not lie against the Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch within a period of,-

¶94

(i) one year from the date on which the Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch enter their respective office;

¶95

(ii) six months preceding the date on which the term of office of the Sarpanch or UpSarpanch, as the case may be, expires;

¶96

(iii) one year from the date on which previous motion of no-confidence was rejected.

¶97

(4) If the Sarpanch or the Up-Sarpanch, as the case may be, desires to challenge the validity of the motion carried out under sub-section (1), he shall, within seven days from the date on which such motion was carried, refer the dispute to the

¶98

-9-

¶99

Collector who shall decide it, as far as possible, within thirty days from the date on which it was received by him, and his decision shall be final. ”

¶100

Perusal of the provision under Section 21 (1) of the Act of 1993 shows that the Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch against whom Motion is passed shall cease to hold office forthwith. Provision under Section 21 (1) of the Act of 1993 is clear and by using the words “shall” and “forthwith” ceasing to hold the office of elected member against whom 'No Confidence Motion' is passed is automatic and mandatory.

¶101

The issue with regard to granting interim relief of stay of proposal of 'No Confidence Motion' carried out against Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch as the case may be was considered in case of Chetan Kurre (supra) wherein the High Court taking note of decisions in the case of Babulal Jain & Ors.Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. 1996 MPLJ 901, Bansilal Motilal Vs. Collector, West Nimar 1975 MPLJ NoC (3), Bal Krishan Patel Vs. Brijendra Patel & Ors. (1985 MPLJ 332), Kaushalya Vs. Additional Collector 1998 (I) MP Weekly Notes (236), Mahant Narayana Dessjivaru Vs. State of Andhra, Hyderabad & Ors . AIR 1959 AP 471, Sat Prakash, etc. Vs. Shiv Lal (AIR 1991 Punjab & Haryana 199), Pratap Chandra Mehta Vs. State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (2011) 9 SCC 573, Afjal Imam Vs. State of Bihar (2011) 5 SCC 729, Babubhai Muljibhai Patel Vs. Nandlal Khodidas Barot (1974) 2 SCC 706, Smt. Basanti Chandra & Ors. Vs. Nand Ram & Ors. 2006 (1) CGLJ

¶102

-10-

¶103

486, Baboo Vs. Tumla 1966 MPLJ Notes of Cases (26), M. Subbarayudu Vs. State (AIR 1955 AP 87), Jabalpur Bus Operators Association & Ors. Vs. State of MP & Ors. 2003 (1) MPLJ 513 has observed thus :-

¶104

“25 . In view of the binding nature of law declared by the Division Bench of the M.P. High Court prior to 1.11.2000, this Court would follow the earlier Division Bench decisions to hold that the moment motion of no confidence is carried against Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch, as the case may be, he ceased to hold the office forthwith and nothing remains for the Collector to stay the effect and operation of carrying of no confidence motion. ”

¶105

The High Court in the aforementioned case allowed the writ petitions and set aside the interim order of stay passed by the Collector in proceedings under Section 21 (4) of the Act of 1993. The High Court held that ceasing of the office of Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch against whom 'No Confidence Motion' is passed is an automatic and even the Collector who is the authority to consider the said objection of the Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch is having no authority to pass any interim order of stay. When the first authority considering correctness of the 'No Confidence Motion' carried out is not having any jurisdiction to pass order of stay, the Commissioner while exercising the powers of revision is also not having any authority to grant interim relief of stay in favour of Sarpanch or Up-Sarpanch against whom 'No Confidence Motion' is passed.

¶106

-11-

¶107

For the aforementioned discussions, WPC No.4848 of 2021 is allowed . Order dated 09.11.2021 to the extent of granting stay of proceedings of 'No Confidence Motion' dated 13.09.2021 and order passed by respondent No.3 on 28.10.2021 being not sustainable in law is hereby set aside. As the revision is already admitted by respondent No.2 and pending consideration since 2021 it is expected from the Revisional Authority to conclude the proceedings in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of order passed by this Court.

¶108

WPS No. 1357 of 2022

¶109

Mr. Mahendra Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner appearing in WPC No.1357 of 2022 submits that in view of decision in the case of Narayan Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (WPC No.4848 of 2021), he is not pressing this writ petition.

¶110

Accordingly, WPC No.1357 of 2022 is dismissed as not pressed.

¶111

Certified copy as per rules.

¶112

Sd/---/-/-/-/--------/--/-

¶113

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶114

Praveen

Shrimati Sangeeta v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrimati Sangeeta v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohan Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rachna Suryawanshi (in Person) Vs State of Chhattisgarh through Principal Secretary

Ashwani Kumar Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganga Prasad Rathore Vs Bajrang Dubey

Kusum Dwivedi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bharatlal Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh