SUVARNABEN CHETANBHAI RAVAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Ms. Shruti Pathak, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for respondent No. 1 -State of Gujarat and Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate, waives service of notices of Rule for respondents Nos. 2 and 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the petition is being heard and decided finally.

(2.) THE petitioner, who was elected as the Sarpanch of Kothara Group Gram Panchayat, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate direction, quashing and setting aside the resolution/proceedings dated 04.09.2014, of Kothara Group Gram Panchayat, accepting the no confidence motion against the petitioner.

(3.) MR . Mehul Sharad Shah, learned advocate for the petitioner, has submitted that the resolution dated 04.09.2014 passing the no confidence motion against the petitioner, makes it clear that the petitioner has not been granted an opportunity of speaking before the no confidence motion was passed. The petitioner was not allowed to address the house before the no confidence motion was put to vote in the meeting held on 04.09.2014, resulting in a serious miscarriage of justice. That the right to address a meeting convened to discuss a no confidence motion is a statutory right available to the petitioner. The interest of justice demanded that the petitioner be permitted to put forth her case before the Gram Panchayat, prior to the voting.