RAM BETI Vs. DISTRICT PANCHAYAT RAJ ADHIKARI BADAUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Genesis giving rise to the present petition is the order dated 11-4-1997 passed by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Budaun whereby the meeting of the Gram Panchayat was convened under Section 14 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act 1947 read with Rule 33-B of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Rules as amended up to date, on 30/04/1997 for discussion and voting on themotion of no confidence moved against the petitioner, who happens to be the Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Sichauli in district Budaun.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner began his arguments, convassing that resort to proceeding of no confidence motion against the petitioner was barred by Sec. 14(3) of the Act, which postulates that if the motion is not taken up for want of quorum or fails for lack of requisite majority at the meeting, no subsequent meeting for the removal of the same Pradhan shall be convened within a year of the date of the previous meeting. A perusal of the record bespeaks that previous notice of intention to move a motion for removal of the petitioner could not culminate into a meeting for discussion and voting on the motion. As a matter of fact, the earlier proceeding appears to have been dropped as a result of preliminary enquiry held at the behest of the Distt. Panchayat Raj Officer, Budaun. In this perspective, the bar created by sub-sec. (3) of Sec. 11 of the Act would not come into play.

(3.) The next question of law raised in this petition, is whether Sec. 14 of the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, as it stands amended by U. P. Act 9 of 1994, providing for removal of the Pradhan of Gram Panchayat infringes upon any tenets of the basic principle of self-Government as enshrined in Part IX of the Constitution which has been inserted by the Constitution (Seventy-Third Amendment) Act, 1992.