Mohanlal Patel vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 582 Chatt

                                      1




                                                                           AFR

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                            WPC No. 596 of 2022

Mohanlal Patel S/o Shri Ahibaran Prasad Patel, Aged About 51 Years Sarpanch,
Gram Panchayat Dhurkot, Janpad Panchayat Dabhra, R/o Village And Post
Dhurkot, Police Station And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir
Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

                                                               ---- Petitioner

                                   Versus

1.    State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Janjgir, Civil And Revenue
      District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa,
      Chhattisgarh

2.    Competent Authority/ Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Dabhra, Civil And
      Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa,
      Chhattisgarh

3.    Presiding Officer/ Tehsildar, Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District
      Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

4.    Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Dabhra, Civil And Revenue
      District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa,
      Chhattisgarh

5.    Smt. Radha Bai Patel, W/o Shri Makardhwaj Patel, Panch Ward No. 1,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

6.    Smt. Manju Maheshwari W/o Shri Bharat Maheshwari, Panch Ward No. 2,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

7.    Jeetram Maheshwari S/o Shri Jhaduram Maheshwari, Panch Ward No. 3,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

8.    Kamal Kumar Dhirhe, S/o Shri Pila Babu Dhirhe, Panch Ward No. 4,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

9.    Tejram Patel S/o Shri Mayadas Patel, Panch Ward No. 5, Gram
      Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station And
      Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.,
      District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

10.   Smt. Kaushilya Rathiya, W/o Shri Ghasiya Ram Rathiya, Panch Ward No.
      6, Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
                                       2




      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

11.   Govind Singh Rathiya, S/o Shri Dukhiram Rathiya, Panch Ward No. 7,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

12.   Smt. Phool Kumari Khuntey, W/o Shri Guharam Khuntey, Panch Ward
      No. 8, Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police
      Station And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

13.   Amar Patel, S/o Shri Rohit Patel, Panch Ward No. 9, Gram Panchayat
      Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station And Tehsil Dabhra,
      Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District :
      Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

14.   Smt. Sushila Patel, W/o Shri Chainsingh Patel, Panch Ward No. 10, Gram
      Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station And
      Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.,
      District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

15.   Duleshwar Shriwas, S/o Shri Chintamani Shriwas, Panch Ward No. 11,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

16.   Smt. Soni Bhardwaj, W/o Shri Vijay Bhardwaj, Panch Ward No. 12, Gram
      Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station And
      Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.,
      District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

17.   Smt. Taralata Parmar, W/o Shri Purushottam Parmar, Panch Ward No. 13,
      Upsarpanch, Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot,
      Police Station And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir
      Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

18.   Ajay Tandon, S/o Shri Sukhram Tandon, Panch Ward No. 14, Gram
      Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station And
      Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.,
      District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

19.   Tilakram Tandon, S/o Shri Nankuram Tandon, Panch Ward No. 15, Gram
      Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station And
      Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.,
      District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

20.   Pushpendra Jatwar, S/o Shri Ghasiya Ram Jatwar, Panch Ward No. 16,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

21.   Smt. Rukmani Mahant, W/o Shri Shivprasad Mahant, Panch Ward No. 17,
      Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
      And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
      Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh
                                                3




     22.     Smt. Shyamkumari Sahu, W/o Shri Tilakram Sahu, Panch Ward No. 18,
             Gram Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station
             And Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa
             Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

     23.     Smt. Neeta Agrawal, W/o Shri Raju Agrawal, Panch Ward No. 19, Gram
             Panchayat Dhurkot. R/o Village And Post Dhurkot, Police Station And
             Tehsil Dabhra, Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.,
             District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

                                                                      ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Nayak, Advocate For State : Mr. Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.19 : Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate

Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

02/02/2022

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the notice of No-confidence

issued by the respondent No.2 for holding the No-confidence Motion on

04.02.2022.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the proceedings holding it to be

violative of Rule 3 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Gram Panchayat Ke

Sarpanch Tatha Up-sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat Tatha Zila

Panchayat ke President and Vice-President Ke Virudh Avishwas

Prastav) Niyam, 1994. According to the petitioner, the proceedings

initiated by the respondent No.3 does not reflect acknowledgement of the

receipt of the complaint from the Panchas, nor is there any particular date

provided so far as receipt of the complaint by the respondent No.2 is

concerned, which is required as per Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 3 of the

aforesaid Rules of 1994.

3. The further contention of the petitioner is that the further requirement

under Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 3 of convening a meeting within 15 days from

the date of receipt of the notice by the respondent No.2 also has not been

followed in this case and a meeting now has been proposed to be

convened much beyond the 15 days period provided under Sub-Rule (3)

of Rule 3.

4. Perusal of the pleadings with the writ petition particularly the proceedings

that have been drawn by the respondent No.2, it reflects that the order

sheet for the first time was recorded on 19.01.2022. In the said

proceedings also there is no reflection of the date and time on which the

respondent No.2 had received the notice from the Panchas for initiating

appropriate proceedings under Section 21(3) of the Panchayat Raj

Adhiniyam. Further, even if 19.01.2022 is accepted to be the date on

which the Sub-Divisional Officer has received the notice from the majority

of the Panchas for initiating the No-Confidence Motion, even then 15

days time had to be adhered to from 19.01.2022. In the instant case, the

No-Confidence Motion is said to be held on 04.02.2022, which is much

beyond 15 days even from 19.01.2022.

5. It would be relevant at this juncture to take note of Sub-Rule (2) and Sub-

Rule (3) of the aforesaid Rules of 1994, which for ready reference is

quoted hereinunder:

"(2) The prescribed authority, on receiving the notice under sub-rule (1) shall sign thereon a certificate stating the date on which hour and at which the notice has been given to him and shall acknowledge its receipt. (3) On receiving the notice under sub-rule (1) the prescribed authority shall satisfy himself about the admissibility of the notice with reference to sections 21(3), 28(3) and 35(3), as the case may be. On being thus satisfied, he shall fix the date, time and place for the meeting of the Gram Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat, as the case may be, which shall not be more than fifteen days from the date of receipt of the said notice. The notice of such meeting specifying the date, time and place thereof shall be caused to be dispatched by him through the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat or Chief Executive Officer of the Janpad or Zila Panchayat,

as the case may be, to every member of the Panchayat concerned seven days before the meeting."

6. The plain reading of the aforesaid provision of law clearly gives an

indication that on receipt of a notice by the competent authority, there has

to be a certificate issued stating the date and time on which at which the

notice was received by him and there also has to be an acknowledgment

of receipt issued in this regard. Prima facie this fact seems to be missing

from the proceedings as the petitioner has furnished the certified copy of

the entire proceedings drawn by the respondent No.2.

7. Further, Sub-Rule (3) also emphatically mandates that the Prescribed

Authority shall fix the date, time and venue for the meeting on the No-

Confidence Motion within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice by

the Prescribed Authority. If 19.01.2022 is the date on which the Sub-

Divisional Officer has received the notice from the Panchas, even then

the date of meeting is beyond 15 days as is otherwise required under the

Rules of 1994.

8. True it is that the petitioner has not been able to show any prejudice that

would be caused to the petitioner's interest upon the meeting being held

beyond 15 days, but the fact remains that under Rule 3 of Rules of 1994,

the requirement of law at the first instance is to hold a meeting within 15

days from the date of receipt of notice. In the instant case, the date and

time of receipt of notice itself is missing and thereafter from the date the

respondent No.2 initiates the proceedings, the meeting proposed to be

held is also beyond 15 days from that. There is no specific reason

assigned by the authority concerned, as to why the meeting could not be

convened within 15 days to justify his action for deviating from the

requirement of law.

9. The Government counsel opposing the petition referring to a judgment of

this Court in the case of "Gopi Lal Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh & others"

WPC No. 3723/2019 argued that, since the petitioner has failed to show

any prejudice therefore only because a meeting is ordered to be

convened beyond 15 days the proceedings cannot be vitiated. The entire

action on the part of the respondent No.2 hence cannot be held to be

bad. Learned State counsel submits that once when the Sarpanch has

lost his confidence of the other Panchas, in the public interest at large he

should not be permitted to remain in office on the post of Sarpanch as

that would be detrimental to the society at large.

10. Perusal of the said judgment in the case of "Gopi Lal Sahu" (supra), when

compared to the proceedings in the present case, it reflects that in the

said matter the proceedings had already been concluded and thereafter

the action was subjected to challenge before the Collector, the

Commissioner and later it travelled to the High Court. But in the instant

case it is only at the initial stage that the petitioner has approached this

Court highlighting the proceedings to be in contravention to the Rules

itself. The meeting has till date not been held. In that event, if the

technical error so far as the requirement under Sub-Rule (2) and Sub-

Rule (3) of the Rules of 1994 which is prima facie visible from the

proceedings to have been deviated, it is something which should be

cured immediately. This Court is therefore of the opinion that it is at this

juncture that this Court can and should interfere with the proceedings so

that the defects, if any, can be cured and a proceeding strictly in

accordance with law is followed.

11. The view taken by this Court in the case of "Gopi Lal Sahu" (supra)

cannot be accepted in a straight jacket manner. The requirement under

Sub-Rule (2) and Sub-Rule (3) cannot be given a go by without any

justifiable reasons and as a matter of routine. Once when the statutes

prescribes a mechanism of convening a meeting, which specific time

limits being granted for issuance of notice and also for holding of the

meeting, the authorities concerned are required to adhere to the said

requirement of the statutes. Only on the basis of the judgment in the case

of "Gopi Lal Sahu" (supra) the requirement of law cannot be diluted.

12. Given the fact that the entire proceedings is only at the issuance of notice

stage, this Court is of the opinion that it would be more appropriate if the

matter stands remitted beck to the authorities with liberty to the

respondents No.5 to 23 to initiate a fresh proceeding strictly in

accordance with the Rules of 1994. The respondents No.2 & 3 also in

turn shall abide by the requirement under the Rules for the purpose of

holding of the meeting. The impugned notice thus deserves to be and is

accordingly set-aside reserving the right of the respondents including the

private respondents to initiate appropriate proceedings if they so want

afresh in accordance with law.

13. The writ petition therefore stands allowed and disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved