VEERAPPA Vs. ASST COMMR LINGASUGUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was the elected Chairman of the village Panchayat Committee, Hanaminahal in Kushtagi Taluk of Raichur District (for short 'the Panchayat'). Some of the members of the Panchayat sent a notice of a motion of no confidence against the petitioner to the Secretary of the Panchayat on 31-5-1980. The Secretary of the Panchayat delivered a copy of the said notice to the petitioner and also forwarded a copy of it to the 2nd respondent Chief Executive Officer, Taluk Development Board, Kushtagi. The petitioner did not call for a meeting of the Panchayat within 30 days from the date of the notice. So the 2nd respondent called for a meeting of the Panchayat to be held on 26-8-1980 for considering the motion of no confidence tabled against the petitioner at 11-30 a.m. in the office of the Panchayat. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the action taken by the 2nd respondent in calling for the meeting of the Panchayat for the consideration of the motion of no confidence tabled against him.

(2.) Sri B.V.Deshpande, the learned Advocate for the petitioner, urged two contentions in favour of issue of rule nisi in the case. They are, (1) that the petitioner was within his competence in taking a decision not to call a meeting of the Panchayat within 30 days as he found the motion of no confidence, a notice of which was given to the Secretary of the Panchayat was not in order; and (2) that the meeting of the Panchayat called by the 2nd respondent was not in accordance with law since 7 days clear notice of the meeting was not given.

(3.) To better appreciate these contentions, it is relevant to refer to some of the provisions of the Karnataka Village Panchayats and Local Boards Act, 1959 ( for short 'the Act') and ajso the rules framed thereunder. S.32 of the Act provides for initiating no confidence motion against the Chairman or the Vice-Chairman. It reads that a motion of no confidence may be moved by any member against the Chairman or the Vice-Chairman after giving such notice as may be prescribed and such notice shall be supported by not less than one-third of the total number of members of the Panchayat and if a meeting for consideration of the motion is not convened by the Chairman within thirty days from the date of notice, the Chief Executive Officer of the Taluk Board shall himself convene the meeting. The rest of S. 32 is not relevant for our purpose. S. 36 of the Act lays down far the convening of the. meeting of the Panchayat. Sub-section (1) provides that a Panchayat shall meet for the transaction of business at least once in every month at the office of the Panchayat and at such time as the Chairman may determine. Sub-section (2) provides for calling a special meeting and it stipulates that the Chairman may, whenever he thinks fit, and shall, upon the written request of not less than one-half of the total number of members, call a special meeting. Sub-sec. (3) which is very material for our purpose reads thus: Seven clear days' notice of an ordinary meeting and two clear days' notice of a special meeting specifying the place, date and time of such meeting and the business to be transacted thereat shall be given to the members and the Gramsevaks and posted in the office of the Panchayat.