J. MOHAMMAD HANIFA Vs. TAHSILDAR, THIRUTHURAIPOONDI, TANJORE DT.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that arises for consideration in this appeal against the judgment of Srinivasan J. is whether the meeting held for the purpose for passing a "no confidence" motion against the President of Kodinkadr Panchayat at a place different form the office of the Panchayat would by reason of that circumstance alone, be invalid. The appellant was the president of the said Panchayat. Certain of its members tabled a motion expressing want of confidence in notice under S. 152 of the Panchayats Act fixed the village temple as the venue of the meeting for the purpose. It is not disputed that the Panchayat has got its own office. The meeting of the members of the Panchayat was, however, not held there but at the temple. At the meeting eight out of nine members of the Panchayat were present and the appellant the president of the Panchayat, was also one among the present. The meeting duly passed the resolution expressing want of confidence in the president. The latter applied to this court under Art. 226 of the Constitution to quash the resolution and the notification removing him from the office of the president, on the ground that the meeting at which the resolution was passed was illegal inasmuch as it was held at a place different form the office of the Panchayat.

(2.) SECTION 152(4) of the Act which deals with the place of meeting states that

(3.) THE appellant participated in the proceedings of the meeting, did not however raise any objection that the meeting was not convened in accordance with the provisions of the statute. Under these circumstances we consider that the appellant should not be allowed to object to it in proceedings under Art. 226 the issue of a writ being purely discretionary. In this view, we affirm the judgment of Srinivasan J. and dismiss the appeal. No costs. Appeal dismissed.