JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. K.D. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 9 to 15 and Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8. None appears for the respondent No. 7. 2. The petitioner is the elected President of No. 22 Charing Pathar Gaon Panchayat, under the Binnakandi Anchalik Panchayat of Nagaon district and she was so elected during the last Panchayat election, which was held in the year 2013. It is the case of the petitioner that being the President, she has been discharging the duties to the utmost satisfaction of all concerned without any complaint or allegation from any one at any point of time. It is the case of the petitioner that on 13.08.2015, the petitioner received a copy of a letter dated 07.08.2015 issued by the Secretary of Charing Pathar Gaon Panchayat, which was addressed to the President of Binnakandi Anchalik Panchayat, requesting him to take necessary steps for convening a meeting for discussing no confidence motion against the petitioner. It was stated that the meeting for discussing the no confidence motion is required to be convened pursuant to the notice dated 21.07.2015 submitted by seven members of the said Gaon Panchayat. 3. The petitioner had challenged the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 in an earlier writ petition being WP (C) No. 4896/2015 on the ground that the said notice was not served upon the petitioner. In the said writ petition being WP (C) No. 4896/2015, this Court by order dated 21.08.2015, had provided that any resolution adopted against the petitioner pursuant to the notice dated 21.07.2015, shall be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition. 4. Since the matter was subjudiced by way of Writ Petition (C) No. 4896/2015, the respondent authorities did not proceed further for convening the no confidence motion against the petitioner. Accordingly, the present respondent Nos. 9 to 15 had approached this Court by way of a writ petition being WP (C) No. 5779/2015, with a prayer for a direction to the official respondents to proceed with the no confidence motion against the petitioner. Accordingly, the present respondent Nos. 9 to 15 had approached this Court by way of a writ petition being WP (C) No. 5779/2015, with a prayer for a direction to the official respondents to proceed with the no confidence motion against the petitioner. This Court by order dated 28.09.2015 had disposed of the writ petition by observing that the Court had considered the order dated 21.08.2015 passed in WP (C) No. 4896/2015, wherein no interim order has been passed and in fact this Court had observed that any resolution against the petitioner pursuant to the said requisition dated 21.07.2015, shall abide by the final outcome of the writ petition. Accordingly, by the said order dated 28.09.2015 in WP (C) No. 5779/2015, this Court had directed the State respondents that the requisition dated 21.07.2015 be proceeded strictly in terms of the provisions laid down in Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994. Subsequent to the order dated 28.09.2015 of this Court, a meeting of no confidence motion was convened on 19.10.2015 by the SDO (Civil), Hojai. In the said meeting, a resolution dated 19.10.2015 was adopted, whereby a no confidence was expressed against the petitioner President by seven members by using the method of secret ballot. Accordingly, the writ petitioner was removed from the post of President of the Gaon Panchayat. By the said resolution dated 19.10.2015, it was also resolved that the Vice President of the Gaon Panchayat namely Md. Sabir Ahmed would discharge the function of President thereafter. 5. The said resolution dated 19.10.2015 is under challenge in this present writ petition. One of the grounds to challenge the impugned resolution dated 19.10.2015 in this writ petition, is that the initial requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was neither served on the petitioner and nor the approval of the petitioner to convene a meeting of no confidence motion was taken by the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat. It may be noticed that the same ground against the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was also taken in the earlier writ petition being WP (C) No. 4896/2015. In the said writ petition, there was an observation in the order dated 21.08.2015 that any resolution of no confidence that may be taken pursuant to the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 would be subject to the final outcome of that writ petition. In the said writ petition, there was an observation in the order dated 21.08.2015 that any resolution of no confidence that may be taken pursuant to the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 would be subject to the final outcome of that writ petition. But after the impugned resolution of removal was adopted on 19.10.2015, the present writ petition has been filed and in the meantime, the earlier writ petition being WP (C) No. 4896/2015 was withdrawn by the petitioner on the premises that the grounds taken in the said writ petition, i.e. the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was not served upon the petitioner President, had also been taken in the present writ petition. Although initially that said writ petition was withdrawn without any liberty to file afresh, but subsequently, an Interlocutory Application No. 2324/2016 had been filed seeking a modification of the earlier order of closure of that writ petition and seeking a liberty to file the petition afresh and take all the grounds that were taken in the said writ petition. The said Interlocutory Application having been allowed by the order dated 21.12.2016, all the grounds that were taken by the writ petitioner in the earlier writ petition being WP (C) No. 4896/2015, are available and open to the writ petitioner to be taken in the present writ petition. 6. In view of the above, the ground taken in this writ petition that the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 had not been served on the petitioner and neither any approval of the petitioner President was taken for convening of the no confidence meeting, is still available to the writ petitioner, to be adjudicated upon. It may also be noticed that while issuing notice in the earlier writ petition WP (C) No. 4896/2015, this Court by order dated 21.08.2015 had provided that the final outcome of the meeting of no confidence motion shall be subject to the final outcome of the said writ petition. This Court by order dated 28.09.2015 in WP (C) No. 5779/2015 by providing that the official respondents may proceed with the no confidence motion against the petitioner had also provided that the no confidence motion against the petitioner would have to be in terms of Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994. 7. This Court by order dated 28.09.2015 in WP (C) No. 5779/2015 by providing that the official respondents may proceed with the no confidence motion against the petitioner had also provided that the no confidence motion against the petitioner would have to be in terms of Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994. 7. In such facts and circumstances of the case, the core issue i.e. to be decided in this writ petition is whether the writ petitioner President was served with the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 for convening a no confidence motion and as to what would be the legal consequence if the said requisition notice was not being served upon the writ petitioner. To arrive at an appropriate decision as to whether the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was served upon the petitioner or not, the Secretary of Charing Pathar Gaon Panchayat was required to file an affidavit stating as to whether the said notice was actually served upon the petitioner President or not. Accordingly, an affidavit dated 15.12.2016 has been filed by the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat. The copy of the affidavit in opposition filed by the respondent No. 8 is kept on record. In paragraph-4 of the said affidavit, it has been stated that the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was forwarded to the writ petitioner on 22.07.2015, with a request note to accord approval for convening a special meeting as per sub-section 1 of Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 by a special messenger. But it has also been stated in the said affidavit that the said notice was not received by the petitioner President. In the said affidavit, the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat has also stated that on the same day, the said Secretary had physically met the petitioner and offered the requisition and requested for approval to convene the special meeting in presence of two local witnesses and one employee of the said Gaon Panchayat. It has also been stated that the writ petitioner had accepted the requisition, but intentionally had neither given acknowledgement receipt nor accorded any approval to convene the special meeting. Accordingly, it is stated that therefore, the petitioner was well aware of the requisition dated 21.07.2015. 8. It has also been stated that the writ petitioner had accepted the requisition, but intentionally had neither given acknowledgement receipt nor accorded any approval to convene the special meeting. Accordingly, it is stated that therefore, the petitioner was well aware of the requisition dated 21.07.2015. 8. Per-contra, the writ petitioner has filed an affidavit in reply to the said affidavit, wherein it is stated that the writ petitioner categorically denies the statement made in paragraph-4 of the said affidavit of the respondent No. 8 Secretary. It is stated by the writ petitioner that the requisition note/forwarding note dated 22.07.2015, for according approval to convene the special meeting, was in fact had never been placed before the writ petitioner by the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat. It has also been stated that the forwarding note dated 22.07.2015 is nothing but only a paper work done by the Secretary being influenced by extraneous consideration to serve some vested interest and only to make out a case for referring the matter to the Anchalik Panchayat to convene the special meeting. The writ petitioner further states that the respondent No. 8 Secretary had neither met the writ petitioner nor offered the requisition dated 21.07.2015 to convene the special meeting as stated in paragraph-4 of the affidavit of the Secretary. It has also been stated that the contention of the Secretary that the requisition notice was offered to the petitioner President and was requested for approval to convene the special meeting, in presence of two local witnesses, and one employee of the office of the Secretary, is manufactured and an afterthought. 9. The aforesaid averment of service of notice made by the Gaon Panchayat Secretary, if read together with the letter dated 07.08.2015 of the Secretary to the President of the Anchalik Panchayat, it can be seen that in the said letter dated 07.08.2015, the Secretary merely writes that on 22.07.2015, a note was forwarded to the President seeking approval for the special meeting. Nothing has been stated that the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was actually placed before the President of the Gaon Panchayat and the President of the Gaon Panchayat had refused to accord the required approval. Nothing has been stated that the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was actually placed before the President of the Gaon Panchayat and the President of the Gaon Panchayat had refused to accord the required approval. In view of such conflicting statements made in the affidavit of the Gaon Panchayat Secretary and in the letter dated 07.08.02015, read together with the categorical denial of the writ petitioner through an affidavit that the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was never served upon the writ petitioner President, this Court is constrained to hold a view that the requisition notice dated 21.07.2015 was not served upon the writ petitioner President. 10. Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 inter-alia, provides that every President or Vice-President shall be deemed to have vacated his office forthwith when resolution expressing want of confidence in him is passed by a majority of two third of the total number of members of the Gaon Panchayat. It is also provided that such a meeting shall be specially convened by the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat with approval of the President of the Gaon Panchayat. Section 15 (1) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 is quoted hereunder:- “(1) Every President or Vice-President shall be deemed to have vacated his office forthwith when resolution expressing want of confidence in him is passed by a majority of two third of the total number of members of the Gaon Panchayat. Such a meeting shall be specially convened by the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat with approval of the President of the Gaon Panchayat. Such meeting shall be presided over by the President if the motion is against the Vice-President, and by the Vice-President, if the motion is against the President. In case such a meeting is not convened within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of notice, the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat shall within three days, refer the matter to the President of the concerned Anchalik Panchayat, who shall convene the meeting within seven days from the date of receipt of the information from the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat and preside over such meeting. In case the President of the Anchalik Panchayat does not take action as above, within the specified seven days time, the concerned Gaon Panchayat Secretary shall inform the matter to the Deputy Commissioner/Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil) as the case may be within three days after the expiry of the stipulated seven days time and the concerned Deputy Commissioner/Sub-Divisional Officer (C) shall convene the meeting within seven days from the date of receipt of the information with intimation to the Zila Parishad and the Anchalik Panchayat and preside over the meeting so convened. Provided that the concerned Deputy Commissioner/Sub-Divisional Officer (C) as the case may be, in case of his inability to preside over the meeting, may depute one Gazetted Officer under him not below the rank of Class-I Gazetted Officer to preside over such meeting. Provided further that when a no-confidence motion is lost, no such motion shall be allowed in the next six months.” Further Sub-Section-2 of Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 provides that the requisition for such special meeting under Sub-Section-1 shall be signed by not less than 1/3rd of total members of the Gaon Panchayat and shall be delivered to the President or Vice-President, as the case may be, of the concerned Gaon Panchayat. Section 15(2) is quoted herein below:- “15.(2)- The requisition for such a special meeting under sub-section (1) shall be signed by not less than one third of the total number of members of the Gaon Panchayat and shall be delivered to the President or Vice-President as the case may be, of the concerned [Gaon Panchayat] with information to the Deputy Commissioner of the District. 11. Having arrived at a conclusion that the requisition dated 21.07.2015, calling for a no-confidence motion was not served and delivered to the President as required u/s 15(2) of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, the issue to be decided is as to whether the provisions of Section 15(1) and 15(2), requiring the requisition notice to be served and delivered upon the President is mandatory or not. A division bench of this Court in Ali Ahmed Mazumdar vs. State of Assam and Others, reported in 2011 (3) GLT 396, in paragraph 10, had held that a legal duty is cast upon the Gaon Panchayat Secretary, who receives the notice on behalf of the President, to inform the President forthwith, about the receipt of such notice with a note put up in the official file for his personal knowledge, and such legal duty on the part of the Gaon Panchayat Secretary is mandatory in nature. The relevant portion of paragraph 10 of the division bench judgment of this Court is quoted as under:- “What actually had happened has already been noted earlier. The necessity of bringing the notice of no confidence motion to the personal knowledge of the President or Vice President has also been discussed. It must be noted that the G.P. Secretary who received the notice on behalf of the President is cast with a legal duty, which is mandatory in nature, to inform the President forthwith about the receipt of such notice with a note put up in official file for his personal knowledge and pass necessary order either according or declining to accord approval to convene the special meeting for discussion on the no confidence motion by the Panchayat Members. Because of the extremely possible disastrous consequence, like removal from office attached to the no confidence motion preceded by compliance of certain statutory procedures as laid down in Section 15 of the Act, we hold that the notice of no confidence motion received by the GP Secretary on behalf of the GP President, cannot be construed as due notice to the President and the period of 15 days as contemplated U/S 15(1) of the Act could be counted only from the date of bringing the notice to personal knowledge of the President formally through official note, and not otherwise. The reason is quite obvious. The reason is quite obvious. A dishonest Panchayat Secretary, for dubious purpose or on extraneous consideration to serve some vested interest, may play mischief by holding back the notice from the President or Vice President against whom the Panchayat members have expressed loss of confidence, to create a situation for it and to show/prove that the President or Vice President has failed to convene the special meeting within 15 days as prescribed U/S 15(1) and make out a case for referring the matter to Anchalik Panchayat to convene a special meeting by it.” 12. In view of the said decision of the division bench of this Court, inter-alia, holding that the requirement of Section 15(1) and 15(2) to serve the requisition notice upon the President of the Gaon Panchayat being mandatory in nature, any non-compliance of the same would vitiate all other subsequent proceedings pursuant to such requisition notice. In the instant case, although the subsequent procedure of Section 15 of referring the matter to the President of the Anchalik Panchayat and the Anchalik Panchayat having convened the meeting, had been followed, but the initial aberration of the statutory procedure, in not serving the requisition notice upon the President of the Gaon Panchayat, would vitiate all subsequent proceeding that may have taken place. In view of such conclusion arrived at by this Court, the impugned resolution dated 19.10.2015 removing the petitioner as the President of the Charing Pathar Gaon Panchayat would be vitiated and not sustainable. Accordingly, the resolution dated 19.10.2015, by which the no-confidence motion was adopted against the petitioner, is set aside. 13. In a similar matter, where the impugned resolution of removing a President of Gaon Panchayat was set aside, this Court in Rita Rani Dushad vs. State of Assam and Others, reported in 2016 (4) GLT 905 had held that the resolution adopting the expression of no confidence against the petitioner President having been set aside and declared null and void for procedural irregularity, this Court will be failing in its duty in exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, if it does not direct the petitioner President to hold a meeting to decide the no confidence motion against her. Accordingly, in the said case, it was directed that the President of the Gaon Panchayat will convene and hold a special meeting within a period of 14 days from the date of the said order, in the office of the Gaon Panchayat. In the said decision, it had also been provided that until the meeting to discuss the no confidence motion against the petitioner President is held and the no confidence motion is decided, the ousted petitioner President will function as the President of the Gaon Panchayat. 14. By following the said decision, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be met if, upon the impugned resolution of removal dated 19.10.2015, being set aside, the petitioner President would take over and discharge the duties of the President of the Gaon Panchayat, till the decision in the subsequent meeting is adopted. 15. In the above facts and circumstances, it is directed that the petitioner President would convene the no-confidence meeting within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and order and for the purpose, appropriate notices would be issued to the members of the Gaon Panchayat within a period of 07(seven) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, indicating date, time and place of the no-confidence meeting to be held. Further, continuance of the writ petitioner as the President of the Gaon Panchayat would depend upon and subject to the final outcome of the no-confidence meeting. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.