Monday, 11, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rabiul vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 5795 Cal

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5795 Cal
Judgement Date : 23 November, 2021

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rabiul vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 23 November, 2021
12.   23.11.2021
      Ct. No.06
      Tanmoy


                                    M.A.T. 855 of 2021
                                            With
                                  IA No: C.A.N. 1 of 2021

                                          Rabiul
                                         -Versus-
                             The State of West Bengal & Ors.

                                (Through Video Conference)

                   Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Adv.

                                     ...for the appellant.

                   Mr. Srijib Chakraborty, Adv.

                                        ...for the respondents.

Mr. Lalit Mohan Mahata, Ld. Sr. Govt. Adv., Mr. Prasanta Behari Mahata, Adv.

...for the State

This appeal has been preferred challenging a

judgment and order dated August 10, 2021, passed by

the learned Single Judge in W.P.A.12439 of 2021

dismissing the writ petition.

Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, learned advocate

appearing on behalf of the then Pradhan of the

relevant Gram Panchayat, submits that in moving the

motion of no confidence, the requirement of Section

12(2) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973, has not

been complied with. It is the case of the appellant

before us that though notice was sent to him at the

residential address, the same was not received by him,

and as such, the meeting held on August 11, 2021 in

terms of 12 (3) of the said Act has no legal

consequence.

Mr. Srijib Chakraborty, learned advocate

appearing for the respondent nos. 8 to 16 on the other

hand submits that notice of the meeting was received

by the Secretary of the relevant Gram Panchayat and

it is the specific finding of the learned Single Judge

that the said notice was handed over to the appellant.

Mr. Lalit Mohan Mahata, learned Advocate

appearing on behalf of the State, submits that in the

meeting held on August 11, 2021, the appellant was

removed as the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat. The

appellant had participated in the meeting. He cannot

turn around and challenge the legality of the said

meeting at this stage. Mr. Mahata, further, submits

that through a democratic process the appellant has

already been removed and as such, this appeal has

become infructuous.

The relevant part of Section 12 reads as follows:

"12. Motion of no confidence or removal of Pradhan or Upa-Pradhan. -

(2) For the purpose of removal of the Pradhan or the Upa-Pradhan, one-third of the existing members referred to in sub-section (1) subject to a minimum of three members shall sign a motion in writing expressing their lack of confidence against the Pradhan or the Upa-Pradhan or recording their intention to remove the Pradhan or the Upa-Pradhan, indicating party affiliation or independent status of each of such members and

either deliver the motion in person through any of the members or send it by registered post to the prescribed authority; one copy of the motion shall be delivered to the concerned office bearer either by hand or by registered post at the Gram Panchayat office and another copy shall be sent by registered post at his residential address."

It is clear that one copy of the motion shall be

delivered to the concerned office bearer either by hand

or by registered post at the Gram Panchayat office

while another copy of the notice has to be sent by

registered post to his residential address. Two

different words, 'delivered' and 'sent' employed in the

same Sub-section indicate the different intention of

the legislature.

When the motion is served upon the office

bearer at the Panchayat office, it has to be ascertained

whether such motion has been delivered upon him or

not, and in case of service at his residential address

the only requirement of Section 12 (2) is that such

motion has to be sent by registered post with proper

postal address and required postal charges.

In view of the above findings, we do not find

any merit in this appeal and, accordingly, the appeal

being M.A.T. 855 of 2021 along with the connected

application being IA No: C.A.N. 1 of 2021 are

dismissed.

However, the appellant shall be at liberty to

challenge the decision of his removal as Pradhan in

accordance with law if he is entitled to do so.

Let urgent photostat certified copy of this order,

if applied for, be supplied to learned Advocates for the

parties upon compliance with all usual formalities.

(Kausik Chanda, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter