Partly allowed

Madhusmita Jena v. Collector,Cuttack

Orissa HC4 Nov 2015WP(C)/11649/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a notice for a no-confidence motion issued to the Sarapanch of Mugagahiri Grama Panchayat. The Court held it was not inclined to interfere with the notice under Article 227 but directed the Sub-Collector to publish the results of the vote held on 03.7.2014 within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Sub-Collector, Athagarh to publish the results of the No Confidence Motion held on 03.7.2014 within two weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

2. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the notice dated 06.6. 2014 issued by the Sub-Collector, Athagarh fixing the date, time and place for the meeting of No Confidence Motion against the petitioner.

3. The petitioner was elected as Sarapanch of Mugagahiri Grama Panchayat in the district of Cuttack in the year 2012. There are eleven Ward Members in the Panchayat. They have passed a resolution on 19.5.2014 to bring a No Confidence Motion against the petitioner on the allega tion that she has lost confidence among the members of the Panchayat. Accordingly, they had se nt the resolution along with requisition to the Sub-Collector, Athagarh to issue a notice to b ring a No Confidence Motion against the petitioner. On receipt of the same, the Sub-Collector, Athagarh issued the impugned notice.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no requisition has been ma de by the Ward Members to call for a meeting of No Confidence Motion against the petitioner. T herefore, the impugned notice is contravention of the provisions of Section 24 (2) (c) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act, 1968. Hence the same need be interfered with.

5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite party nos.1 to 3 contending i nter alia that in the proposed resolution/requisition it was alleged that the petitioner was a cting in a manner inimical to the interest of public, P.R.I members and against the statut ory provisions. That apart her husband was

6. This Court by interim order dated 02.7.2014 directed that the meeting convened on 03.7 .2014 shall be held in accordance with law, but the resolution, if any, shall not be published without leave of this Court. The said order is continuing till date.

7. The Ward Members of the Panchayat who have intervened in this Writ Petition have also filed counter affidavit stating that taking advantage of the interim order passed by this Cour t, the petitioner is calling for the meetings of the Grama Panchayat with a motive to have und ue financial benefit out of Government funds entrusted to the Grama Panchayat for execution of developmental works.

8. Considering the above facts and circumstance, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned notice in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, this Court directs the Sub-Collector, Athagarh opposite party no.2 to pub lish the results of the No Confidence Motion held on 03.7.2014 against the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order and take cons equential action thereafter in accordance with law.

Madhusmita Jena v. Collector,Cuttack

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhusmita Jena v. Collector,Cuttack

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

Case details

Similar cases

Aradhana Enclave Owners Association Vs Vc,Bhubaneswar Development Authority,Bbsr

Nabanita Parichha Vs Executive Officer,Balangir Municipality

Shashimira Nayak Vs State of Orissa

Santosh Ku.Patra Vs Commissioner Cum Secy.

E. Manoj Ku Patra Vs Tahasildar,Jharigaon

Manoranjan Behera Vs State of Orissa