SEENIAMMAL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a writ of Certiorari calling for the records on the file of the first respondent in G. O. Ms. No. 15, Rural Development (C1) dated 20. 2. 2003 and published in the tamil Nadu Government Gazette Part II Section III dated 20. 2. 2003 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction.

(2.) THE petitioner, was elected as a Chairman of srivilliputhur Panchayat Union on 31. 10. 2001 in the reserved women constituency. Out of the total strength of 15 Councillors of the Panchayat union, according to the petitioner, 2 belonged to Congress, 6 to AIADMK, 3 mdmk, 2 DMK and one each to Pudhiya Tamilagam and Communist Party of India. Accordingly, the petitioner assumed office on 31. 10. 2001. She continued for ten months and then the trouble started at the instance of the local M. L. A. Thiru R. T. Inbatamizhan, who was trying to interfere with the administration of the Panchayat Union. When he had been insisting that the contracts should be given for public work to those persons nominated by him, she expressed her inability to adhere to the suggestions of the M. L. A. , she cannot take unilateral decisions. Therefore, he arranged the Councillors to pass No confidence Motion to remove the petitioner from the Chamber of the Panchayat union. It is also stated that on 22. 10. 2002 within one year of her election as Chairman, a No Confidence Motion was moved and on the basis of the complaint the second respondent had telephonically called upon the third respondent on 13. 11. 2002 to convene a meeting. Referring to the telephonic conversation, the third respondent had convened a meeting to be held in the office of the second respondent on 18. 11. 2002. A complaint was lodged by 12 of the Councillors and it was handed over to the said local M. L. A. , and the said local M. L. A. , in his turn "recommended to the Revenue Divisional Officer, the second respondent to take action against the Chairman of the Panchayat union under Section 212 of the Local Administrative Act by removing the petitioner from the post of Chairman for creating bad reputation to the Ruling government in Tamil Nadu. " A complaint was lodged by 12 Councillors, one of the Councillor Mr. K. Ravi, 9th Ward Councillor coming to know of the complaint had protested on 31. 10. 2002 that he had not endorsed his signature on the complaint dated 22. 10. 2002, he had further reiterated the same in the meeting convened on 18. 11. 2002 in the office of the second respondent and the second respondent also appears to have lodged a complaint to the police and a criminal case had been registered in Crime No. 911/2002 under Section 468 of i. P. A. , and the case is pending investigation. Section 212 (14) and (15)mandates that no motion shall be received within a period of one year of assumption of office of Chairman and if the motion had failed for some reason as set forth in Section 212 (14) another motion cannot be moved within a period of one year of that date. On the basis of the recommendation of the said local M. L. A. On 22. 10. 2002, the second respondent has issued a show cause notice to the petitioner. The petitioner was called upon to offer her explanation and a meeting was proposed to be held on 27. 12. 2002. The notice of such meeting was circulated on 5. 12. 20 02. The petitioner denied the charges made against her in and by her letter dated 2. 12. 2002. The petitioner was required to submit her written explanation for the charges within one week from the date of receipt of the memorandum. By letter dated 27. 11. 2002, immediately the petitioner requested the Revenue Divisional Officer to furnish a copy of the letter of the said M. L. A dated 22. 10. 2002. The second respondent refused to give the copy of the letter. She submitted her explanation on 2. 12. 2002. Thereafter, a notice dated 5. 12. 2002 was issued by fixing the date of meeting to move No Confidence Motion against the petitioner on 27. 12. 2002. Accordingly, the meeting was held on 27. 12. 2002 and No confidence Motion was moved. Accordingly, the petitioner was removed from the post of Chairman. As int imated by the third respondent to the Government under sub-section of Section 212 of the Act, the Government issued the impugned order.

(3.) NOW, on the basis of the above said facts and circumstances of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to section 212 of the Act which reads as follows:-Sec. 212 Motion of no confidence in (Chairman or Vice-Chairman) of Panchayat union Council:- (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a motion expressing want of confidence in the (chairman or vice-chairman) of a panchayat union council may be made in accordance with the procedure laid down herein. (2) Written notice of intention to make the motion, signed by members of the panchayat union council not less in number than one-half of the sanctioned strength of the panchayat union council, together with a copy of the motion which is proposed to be made and a written statement of the charges against the (chairman or vice-chairman) shall be delivered in person to the Revenue divisional Officer of the division by any two of the members of the panchayat union council signing the notice. (3) A copy of the statement of charges along with the motion shall be caused to be delivered to the concerned (chairman or vice-chairman) by the Revenue divisional Officer and the (chairman or vice-chairman) shall be required to give a statement in reply to the charges within a week of the receipt of the motion by the (chairman or vicechairman ). (4) The Revenue Divisional Officer shall then convene a meeting for the consideration of the motion at the office of the panchayat union council at a time appointed by him. (5) The Revenue Divisional Officer shall given to the members notice of not less than fifteen clear days of the meeting and of the time appointed therefor. (9) As soon as the meeting convened under this section has commenced, the revenue Divisional Officer shall read to the panchayat union council the motion for the consideration of which it has been convened, the statement of charges and the statement, if any, of the (chairman or vice-chairman) in reply to the said charges. (10) There shall be no debate on any motion under this section. (12) A copy of the minutes of meeting together with a copy of the motion and the result of the voting thereon shall forthwith on the termination of the meeting be forwarded by the Revenue Divisional Officer to the Government. (14) If the motion is not carried by such a majority as aforesaid, or if the meeting cannot be held for want of the quorum referred to in sub-section (13), no notice of any subsequent motion expressing want of confidence in the same (chairman or vice-chairman) shall be received until after the expiry of (one year) from the date of the meeting. (15) No notice of a motion under this section shall be received within (one year) of the assumption of office by the (chairman or vicechairman ). "