GOPALAKRISHNAN v. EXECUTIVE OFFICER — 1981 DIGILAW 131 (KER)

Judgment :- 1. The petitioner, stated to be the President of the Idikki-Kanhikuzhi Panchayat, has come up to this court with this writ petition under Art.226 of the Constitution challenging Ext. P1 notice of the second respondent, the District Panchayat Officer, Idikki, and Exts. P2, P3 and P4 consequential proceedings and orders. 2. Ext P1 is a notice dated 15-11-80 issued by the second respondent to the petitioner purported to be under sub-section (2) of S.54 of the Kerala Panchayats Act, (Act 32 of 1960), for short the Act. The material portion of that notice reads as follows: "Whereas a notice of intention to make a motion expressing want of confidence in the President of the Idukki-Kanjikurtii Panchayat has been delivered to the District Panchayat Officer, Idukki under Sub-section (2) of S.54 of the Kerala Panchayats Act 1960 (Act 32 of 1960); now, therefore, under Sub-section (3) of S.54 of the said Act, I, District Panchayat Officer, Idukki, propose to convene a meeting for the consideration of the notice, and hereby give notice that a meeting of the Panchayat shall be held at the Office of the Panchayat on 11-12-1980 at 11.30 A.M. for considering the said motion." Ext. P2 is the copy of the resolution expressing no confidence in the President proposed to be moved at the meeting to be convened in response to the requisition in that behalf. Ext. P3 is the copy of the proceedings of the special meeting of the Panchayat convened by the second respondent on 11-12-1980 in pursuance of Ext. P1 notice; and Ext. P4 is the copy of the proceedings of the first respondent, the Executive Officer, by which the petitioner was informed that on 11-12-1980 no confidence motion against him had been passed; and, therefore, within two days from the receipt of that notice he should resign from the office of the Panchayat President. 3. The submission made by the counsel for the petitioner is that under S.54(2) of the Act, it is only the Deputy Director who is empowered to receive a notice of intention to make a motion of no confidence. Sub-section (2) of S.54 of the Kerala Panchayats Act reads as follows: "54(2). 3. The submission made by the counsel for the petitioner is that under S.54(2) of the Act, it is only the Deputy Director who is empowered to receive a notice of intention to make a motion of no confidence. Sub-section (2) of S.54 of the Kerala Panchayats Act reads as follows: "54(2). Written notice of intention to make the motion in such form as may be fixed by the Government, signed by such number of members as shall constitute not less than one half of the total strength of the Panchayat, together with a copy of the motion which is proposed to be made shall be delivered by any two members signing the notice in person to the Deputy Director." The Government Pleader, and the counsel for the additional respondents 4 to 9, sought to take shelter under G. O. Ms. 439/64/A & RDD dated 10-9-1964 to justify the action of the second respondent, the District Panchayat Officer in receiving the notice and convening the meeting pursuant thereto. The G. O. relied on reads as follows: "SRO. No. 294/64.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (3) of S.143 of the Kerala Panchayats Act, 1960 (Act 32 of 1960), the Government of Kerala hereby authorise the District Panchayat Officers of this State to exercise in regard to all the Panchayats within their respective jurisdictions the power to receive the written notice of intention to make the motion of no confidence in the President or in the Vice-President and the copy of the motion which is proposed to be made, vested in the Deputy Directors of Panchayats under sub-section (2) of S.54 of the said Act, subject to the power of control and revision by the concerned Deputy Director of Panchayats and the Director of Panchayats." (emphasis supplied) 4. It is true that the said notification empowered the District Panchayat Officer, the second respondent, to receive the written notice of intention to make the motion of no confidence in the President; there is, however, nothing therein expressly or by necessary implication, empowering the second respondent to convene a meeting in exercise of the powers under sub-section (3) of S.54 of the Act. This being the position, Ext. P1 notice issued and Ext. P3 proceedings passed by the second respondent are without jurisdiction. Needless to say that Ext. This being the position, Ext. P1 notice issued and Ext. P3 proceedings passed by the second respondent are without jurisdiction. Needless to say that Ext. P2 resolution passed by the members voting for the no confidence and Ext. P4 notice calling upon the petitioner to resign his office also are null and void. 5. For the foregoing reasons this writ petition is allowed quashing Exts. P1 to P4. This, however, will not take away the right of members concerned to pursue the matter, if they are so advised, in due compliance with the statutory provisions. There will be no order as to costs. A carbon copy of this judgment may be granted to the Government Pleader free of charge, and to the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the additional respondents 4 to 9 on usual terms if applied for in that behalf.