The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.26728 of 2024 Ritupriya Naik …. Petitioner Mr. Subir Palit, Senior Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha & others …. Opposite Parties
Legal Reasoning
Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA for O.P. Nos. 1 to 4 Mr. A.P. Bose, Advocate for O.P. No.5 CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
Decision
ORDER 30.11.2024 Order No. 05. 1. Heard Mr. Palit, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Bose, learned counsel for opposite party No.5 and Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State opposite party Nos.1 to 4. 2. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned notice dated 8th October, 2024 as at Annexure-1 for convening a meeting vis-a-vis no confidence motion scheduled to be held on 5th November, 2024 on the grounds stated therein. 3. Abandoning such other grounds pleaded on record, Mr. Palit, learned Senior Advocate would submit that the meeting for the resolution vis-(cid:224)-vis the vote of confidence since having not been convened and presided over by the Sarpanch as a statutory mandate in view of Section 19 Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), the entire exercise towards the same stands invalid. It is submitted that as per Sub-Section (2) of Section 19 of the Act, the Sarpanch shall have to convene and preside over the meetings of the G.P. and regulate the same and to be responsible for the proceeding and in so far as the decision as per the resolution is concerned, the meeting for the said purpose was not held in Page 1 of 4 accordance therewith, so therefore, the action initiated in terms of Section 24 is vitiated and as a necessary corollary, the impugned notice dated 8th October, 2024, which is, hence, liable to be interfered with and set aside. 4. On the contrary, Mr. Bose, learned counsel for opposite party No.5 submits that Section 19 of the Act deals with the executive powers of the Sarpanch, which is nothing to do with the vote of confidence proposed and initiated as per Section 24 thereof. Mr. Bose, learned counsel would further submit that the Sarpanch is to convene and preside over the meetings of the G.P. and be responsible for the administrative actions. It is contended that the powers, duties and functions of Sarpanch have been delineated under the Act, whereas, Section 24 deals with the no confidence motion to be initiated against him or the Naib-Sarpanch as the case may be. 5. As far as the vote of confidence is concerned, there is a resolution in place as made to reveal from Annexure-1 series followed by the impugned notice dated 8th October, 2024. Some of the Ward Members of the G.P. have moved the resolution and it was submitted to the Sub-Collector, Kaptipada, namely, opposite party No.2, who, thereafter, fixed the date of meeting for the motion. In so far as the Section 24 Act is concerned, it relates to the no confidence motion and a meeting for the resolution may be held at any place, not necessarily at the G.P. itself and such action in against Sarpanch and Naib-Sarpanch, as according to the Court, is to be considered upon receiving a requisition. In the instant case, with the resolution passed by the Ward Members of the G.P., the requisition was received by opposite party No.3, who then, fixed the date for the vote of confidence. Page 2 of 4 6. Considering the submissions of Mr. Palit, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Bose, learned counsel for opposite party No.5 as well as Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State, the Court is of the conclusion that a meeting for the resolution to be passed need not necessarily be convened and presided over by the Sarpanch and Naib-Sarpanch as it is in connection with no confidence motion, which is initiated against them. The Court is in agreement with the contention of Mr. Bose, learned counsel for opposite party No.5 that Section 19 of the Act deals with the executive powers and the same is to be exercised by the Sarpanch to convene and preside over regular meetings of the G.P. Similar provision is in place as per Section 21 of the Act, which provides the authority to the Naib-Sarpanch, in case the Sarpanch is absent with the power being delegated to him. The Court is of the conclusion that the proposal having been submitted with a resolution and it was signed by the Ward Members, who attended the meeting notwithstanding the resolution having not been signed by the Sarpanch, the action under Section 21 of the Act cannot be defeated with a reference to Section 19 thereof. In other words, the Ward Members having lost the confidence on the Naib-Sarpanch and submitted the resolution with a requisition to opposite party No.3, there has been due compliance of the provisions of the Act, which cannot be objected to referring to Section 19, which deals with the general powers, duties and functions of Sarpanch. 7. Having said that, the final conclusion is that the contention of Mr. Palit, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner is unacceptable and hence, the same is liable to be rejected. 8. In so far as the disqualification against some of the Ward Members is concerned, notwithstanding pendency of the action, the proceeding for a vote of confidence as per Section 24 of the Act Page 3 of 4 cannot be opposed and objected to as it has been settled law that the proceedings under Sections 24 and 26 of the Act are independent of each other and mutually exclusive. In fact, such a view has been reiterated by this Court in W.P.(C) No.26251 of 2024 disposed of on 14th November, 2024 referring to one of its earlier decisions in Ananda Pradhan Vrs. Collector, Khurda and others reported in AIR 2011 Orissa 130. 9. Hence, it is ordered. 10. In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed. 11. The interim order dated 4th November, 2024 passed in I.A. No. 14280 of 2024 stands vacated as a result. 12. Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Balaram Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BALARAM BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 30-Nov-2024 17:56:49 Page 4 of 4