Disposed

Abdul Wohhab and 7 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Gauhati HC16 Nov 2022WP(C)/4927/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the Gauhati High Court addressed an incomplete No Confidence Motion meeting against a Gaon Panchayat President halted due to the Secretary's illness. The court directed relevant state respondents to fix a date for continuing the meeting within 25 days to complete the secret ballot, rejecting the argument for a fresh motion.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to fix a date for continuing the meeting within 25 days to hold a secret ballot.

Abdul Wohhab and 7 Ors. Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/8

¶2

GAHC010146332022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/4927/2022

¶5

ABDUL WOHHAB AND 7 ORS. S/O MONOHAR ALI, VILL.- SHOLAGHARI, WARD NO. 04, P.O.- KANAIBAZAR, DIST.- KARIMGANJ, ASSAM,PIN- 788724.

¶6

2: SALIM AHMED S/O ABDUL HAI

¶7

VILL.- SATHGHARI

¶8

P.O.- KANAIBAZAR WARD NO. 6

¶9

DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724.

¶10

3: SADIQUE AHMED S/O MUDDASSIR ALI

¶11

VILL.- DEUBARI WARD NO. 05

¶12

P.O.- KANAIBAZAR

¶13

DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724.

¶14

4: REHANA BEGUM W/O FURAD UDDIN

VILL.- CHALEPUR

Page No.# 2/8

WARD NO. 01

P.O.- BARAIGRAM

DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788723. 5: ABDUL JABBAR S/O SUNAHAR ALI

¶20

VILL.- BAGARSANGAN WARD NO. 08

¶21

P.O.- KANABAZAR

¶22

DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724. 6: RAHIMA BEGUM W/O SHARIF UDDIN VILL.- MURAURA WARD NO. 02 P.O.- ASALKANDI

¶23

DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788723.

¶24

7: JANNATUNNESA KHATUN W/O ABDUL HAQUE VILL.- MURADPUR WARD NO. 03 P.O.- KANAIBAZAR

¶25

DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724.

¶26

8: SALIMA BIBI W/O ABU BAKKAR

VILL.- BAZARGHAT

Page No.# 3/8

WARD NO. 10

P.O.- KANAIBAZAR

DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724 VERSUS

¶32

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS.

¶33

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, JURIPAR, GUWAHATI- 37.

¶34

2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KARIMGANJ P.O. AND DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788710. 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KARIMGANJ ZILLA PARISHAD P.O. AND DSIT.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788710. 4:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PATHARKANDI DEV. BLOCK P.O.- PATHARKANDI DIST.- KARIMGANJ DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724. 5:THE PRESIDENT PATHARKANDI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O.- PATHARKANDI DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724.

¶35

6:THE SECRETARY 21 NO. KANAIBAZAR GAON PANCHAYAT P.O.- KANAIBAZAR DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724.

¶36

Page No.# 4/8

¶37

7:MOMTAJ BEGAM TALUKDAR PRESIDENT 21 NO. KANAIBAZAR GAON PANCHAYAT P.O.- KANAIBAZAR DIST.- KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724.

¶38

8:HUSNA BEGAM W/O KABIR AHMED VICE PRESIDENT 21 NO. KANAIBAZAR GAON PANCHAYAT P.O.- KANAIBAZAR DIST KARIMGANJ ASSAM PIN- 788724

¶39

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R TALUKDAR

¶40

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶41

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶42

ORDER

¶43

16.11.2022

¶44

Heard Mr. A.R. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr.

¶45

M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7. Ms. N. Bora, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 6 and Mr. N. Goswami, learned counsel appears for the respondent No. 2.

¶46

The 8 (eight) petitioners were elected as Ward Members of the 21 No. Kanaibazar Gaon Panchayat [‘the Gaon Panchayat’, for short] under Patarkandi Anchalik Panchayat.

¶47

Page No.# 5/8

¶48

It is the case of the petitioners that on 13.06.2022, 9 (nine) Ward Members of the Gaon Panchayat submitted a requisition notice, expressing want of confidence against the respondent no. 7 to continue as the President of the Gaon Panchayat. After complying with the necessary formalities following the requisition notice under the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, notice was issued to all the stakeholders to attend a special meeting scheduled to be at 11.30 am on 28.06.2022, to discuss the motion of no confidence against the respondent no.7 in her capacity as the President of the Gaon Panchayat. The proceeding of the special meeting so convened started with the attendance of 9 (nine) Ward Members of the Gaon Panchayat with the respondent no. 8, i.e. the Vice President of the Gaon Panchayat in the Chair. As per resolution no. 1 of the Special Meeting Minutes dated 28.06.2022, the 9 (nine) Ward Members after discussion, decided to proceed to vote on the no confidence motion against the President i.e. the respondent no. 7. However, before the start of the vote on the no confidence motion, the respondent no. 6, i.e. the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat became unconscious and he had to be shifted to a hospital for his medical treatment. It was on that premise that the respondent no. 8 adjourned the Special meeting, without fixing another date for continuation of the meeting.

¶49

Mr. A.R. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction may be issued to the State respondents, directing them to fix a date

¶50

Page No.# 6/8

¶51

for holding a Special meeting of No Confidence Motion, as the earlier Special Meeting of the No Confidence Motion could not be completed.

¶52

Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7 submits that a fresh No Confidence Motion can be initiated against the respondent No. 7, by giving grounds of the No Confidence Motion to the respondent No. 7. The counsel for the respondent No. 7 submits that some of the Ward members of the Gaon Panchayat, who had initially submitted requisition notice, expressing want of confidence against the respondent No. 7, are now supporting the respondent No. 7. He accordingly submits that a fresh No Confidence Motion should be held against the respondent No. 7, as per law.

¶53

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶54

The Special Meeting Minutes dated 28.06.2022 of the Kanaibazar Gaon Panchayat Office shows that 9 Ward members attended the meeting, including the President and the Vice President. Resolution No. 1 of the Meeting Minutes states that a discussion was held on the No Confidence Motion wherein, all the members unanimously expressed their No Confidence against the President and the No Confidence Motion was accepted. Resolution No. 2 however states that before the start of voting on the No Confidence Motion, the Presiding Officer of the meeting, i.e. the respondent No. 8 adjourned the meeting as the Secretary, i.e. the respondent No. 6 became unconscious and was shifted to a hospital.

¶55

The facts of the case clearly show that the Special meeting on the No

¶56

Page No.# 7/8

¶57

Confidence Motion that was being held on 28.06.2022, could not be completed due to the respondent No. 6 becoming unconscious and being shifted to a hospital. Though the meeting of the No Confidence Motion could have continued even in the absence of the respondent No. 6, the respondent No. 8 had adjourned the Special meeting, without fixing another date for continuation of the meeting. As the meeting of the No Confidence Motion is still incomplete as on date, this Court is of the view that in the special facts and circumstance of the case, the Special meeting of the No Confidence Motion which was held on 28.06.2022 should continue. Thus, the only procedure required for completing the Special meeting dated 28.06.2022 of the No Confidence Motion, is to the hold a secret ballot in respect of the No Confidence Motion. With regard to the contention of the respondent No. 7 that some of the Ward members are now supporting the respondent No. 7, this Court is of the view that if some of the Ward members are now supporting the respondent No. 7, they can always make their decision known, by voting against the No Confidence Motion.

¶58

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 & 6 are directed to fix a date for continuing the meeting of the No Confidence Motion held on 28.06.2022, so that the Ward members can hold a secret ballot. The respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 & 6 shall fix a date for continuing the meeting of the No Confidence Motion, within a period of 25 days after receipt of a certified copy of this Order by the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 shall convene

¶59

Page No.# 8/8

¶60

a meeting of the respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4 & 6 as soon as he receives a copy of

¶61

this order, so as to decide the date for continuation of the Special meeting dated 28.06.2022, in relation to the No Confidence Motion against the respondent No.

¶62

¶63

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶64

JUDGE

¶65

Comparing Assistant

Abdul Wohhab and 7 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Wohhab and 7 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mitrajyoti Deka and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

The Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon Vs Hareshwar Borah and Anr.

Bijaylakhmi Laskar Dutta Vs the Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Rupa Paul Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Manik Chand Singha Vs State Bank of India and Anr.

Minara Begum Choudhury Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.