A Pramukh challenged a requisition by five Panchayat Samiti members for a special meeting to consider a no-confidence motion against her. The court held she could not refrain from fixing the meeting date and directed her to fix it per Sections 44 and 46; disposed of the writ petition.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.668 of 2024
======================================================
Sangeeta Devi Wife of Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Prasad, Resident of VillageSikari, Post- Kolhua, P.S.- Adhaura, Grampanchayat- Kalhua, DistrictKaimur, At present- Pramukh, Adhaura, Kaimur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Rajesh Pd. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.6-10 and Mr. Prashant Pratap, learned GP-2 appearing on behalf of the State.
Patna High Court CWJC No.668 of 2024(3) dt.23-01-2024 2/7
aggrieved by the requisition dated 02.01.2024, submitted by five Panchayat Samiti Members for holding of the special meeting and for quashing the Letter No.05, dated 03.01.2024 in which a request has been made to convey the Special Meeting of the Block Panchayat Samiti to consider the ‘no confidence motion’ against the petitioner and for stay of the Special Meeting dated 16.01.2024. It is contended by Mr. Waliur Rahman, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that allegations are not sustainable and requisition has been called by a group of elected members of the committee to topple the petitioner on frivolous charges.
Patna High Court CWJC No.668 of 2024(3) dt.23-01-2024 3/7
submitted that the petitioner after fixing the date of special meeting of ‘no confidence motion’ on 16.02.2024 at 11.00AM has rushed before this Court defeating the very purpose of ‘no confidence motion’. He informs that this Court had interfered into the matter and vide the order dated 11.01.2024 the meeting has been deferred. He submitted that the petitioner being the Pramukh is required to act in accordance with the provisions of Section 44 of the Act and must not refrain from re-fixing the date of special meeting, after having admitted that a communication made by her as contained in letter no.117/01 dated 02.01.2024 fixing date of special meeting on 16.01.2024.
Patna High Court CWJC No.668 of 2024(3) dt.23-01-2024 4/7
“1- iapk;r lfefr dk cSBd izR;sd nks ekg ij djuk gS ysfdu vkids }kjk nks o’kksZa esa vcrd rhu ckj gh fd;k x;k gS] tks fcgkj iapk;r jkt foHkkx vf/kfu;e 2006 ds fo:) gSA
2- lHkh fuokZpu {ks= esa leku :i ls jkf”k dk forj.k ugha fd;k tk jgk gS] tcfd ljdkj }kjk lHkh fuokZpu {ks=ksa ds fodkl ds fy, leku :i ls jkf”k dk vkoaVu djrh gS] tcfd vkids }kjk jkf”k forj.k esa euekuh joS;k viuk;k tkrk gSA
3- vkids }kjk izeq[k d{k esa dk;kZy; vof/k ds nkSjku vkidh mifLFkfr ux.; gS ftlls ge tuizfrfuf/k ,oa turk dh leL;k dk lek/kku ugha
Patna High Court CWJC No.668 of 2024(3) dt.23-01-2024 5/7
djk ik jgs gSA tcfd iz[k.M izeq[k gksus ds ukrs turk dh leL;k ds funku gsrq izeq[k d{k miyC/k djk;k x;k gSA
4- fofHkUu LFkk;h lfefr dh xBu ds mijkar m|ru ,d Hkh cSBd dk vk;kstu ugha fd;k tkuk dkQh fpUrktud gSA blls xfBr LFkkbZ lfefr dk vkSfpR; ij gh iz”u fpUg yx x;k gSA ”
members of the Panchayat Samiti have made a requisition for calling a special meeting of ‘no confidence motion’. The petitioner had fixed the date of special meeting of ‘no confidence motion’. Now he being a democratically elected member of the Panchayat Samiti can not restrain from fixing a date of meeting.
Patna High Court CWJC No.668 of 2024(3) dt.23-01-2024 6/7
and dignity to the Panchayat Raj Institution. For better appreciation Section 44 sub-section (3) sub-clause (ii) of the Act is being reproduced hereinunder:
‘(ii) No confidence motion shall not be moved against the Pramukh or the Up-pramukh within the first two year period of their tenure.1 [ Such a no confidence motion may be brought only once in the whole tenure of Pramukh/Uppramukh.]’
(Emphasis applied)
Chairperson, Pramukh is as per constitutional provision and in this context Article 243N of the Constitution of India in part 9 is relevant and same is reproduced hereinbelow:
“ Article-243N. Continuance of existing laws and
Panchayats -
Notwithstanding anything in this Part, any provision of any law relating to Panchayats in force in a State immediately before the commencement of the Constitution (Seventy-third Amendment) Act, 1992, which is inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall continue to be in force until amended or repealed by a competent Legislature or other competent authority or until the expiration of one year from such commencement, whichever is earlier:
Provided that all the Panchayats existing immediately before such commencement shall continue till the
Patna High Court CWJC No.668 of 2024(3) dt.23-01-2024 7/7
expiration of their duration, unless sooner dissolved by a resolution passed to that effect by the Legislative Assembly of that State or, in the case of a State having a Legislative Council, by each House of the Legislature of that State .”
mandate of people and the same can only be calling a ‘no confidence motion’ by the member of the Panchayat Samiti including the Pramukh, the Up-pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti.
(Purnendu Singh, J.)
Ashishsingh/- U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Pramukh can resist a special meeting for a no-confidence motion requisitioned by majority Panchayat Samiti members under Section 44.
Was the no-confidence motion barred by Section 44(3)(ii)'s two-year restriction?
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Sangeeta Devi
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Panchayati Raj Department, Government of Bihar, Patna
The District Magistrate-Cum-District Election Officer, Kaimur, Bhabua
The Sub Divisional Officer, Bhabhua, Kaimur
The Block Development Officer, Adhaura, Kaimur
The Block Panchayat Raj Officer-Cum Executive-Officer, Adhaura, Kaimur
Purnendu Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
