Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 128 (ORI)

Sandhyatara Behera v. Sub-Collector, Nuapada

2011-02-28

R.N.BISWAL

body2011
ORDER 28.02.2011 — Even though the matter was listed to date for admission, on consent and request of learned counsel for both the sides, it was taken up for final disposal and the following order is passed. The petitioner was elected as the Sarpanch of Chindaguda Gram Panchayat under Khariar Block in the district of Nuapada in the year 2007. It is alleged that the opposite party No. 1 being misguided and persuaded by opposite party No.2 fixed a meeting on 8th March 2010 in the office of Chindaguda Gram Panchayat to record want of confidence against the petitioner, under Annexure-1. It is pertinent to mention here that on 3.3.2010 it was ordered in Misc. Case No. 3446 of 2010 that “Let No Confidence Motion in respect of Sarpanch of Chindaguda Gram Panchayat continue but the result thereof shall not be notified without leave of this Court”. Accordingly, as submitted in the Bar, No Confidence Motion was held against the Sarpanch on the date and time fixed under Annexure-1, but due to the aforesaid interim order the result thereof has not been published. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as required under Section 24(2)(a) of the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, a resolution proposed to be moved during the time of holding the meeting of Want of Confidence against the Sarpanch ought to have been sent to the Sub-Collector, along with requisition. But, in the present case, no such proposed resolution having been passed in the meeting, let alone sending a copy thereof to the Sub-Collector, the notice under Annexure-1 and the subsequent proceedings thereto deserve to be quashed. As against this, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties contend that there is no specific format of the Proposed Resolution either under the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act or Rules framed there under. In the case at hand Annexure-3 is the proposed Resolution. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage contends that in fact Annexure-3 is not the proposed resolution. It is a resolution wherein it was proposed to initiate No Confidence Motion against the petitioner by sending requisition in that regard to the Sub-Collector. On perusal of Annexure-3 it appears that it is the proposed resolution to be moved at the time of holding meeting of Want of Confidence against the petitioner and Annexure-4 is the requisition sent to the Sub-Collector. On perusal of Annexure-3 it appears that it is the proposed resolution to be moved at the time of holding meeting of Want of Confidence against the petitioner and Annexure-4 is the requisition sent to the Sub-Collector. There is no illegality in the notice under Annexure-1 and as such the writ petition stands dismissed. It is needless to say that since the writ petition stands dismissed the Misc. Case No. 3446 of 2010 automatically stands disposed of. So, the official opp. parties are at liberty to publish the result of No Confidence Motion held against the petitioner. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Petition dismissed.