KIRAN DEVI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution challenges the No -confidence motion, initiated by the private respondents herein and the order, Annexure P -1, whereby the Sub -Divisional Officer/Prescribed Authority has issued notice and fixed the meeting for the purpose of No -Confidence Motion on 13.8.2013.

(2.) ASSAILING this order/notice, Shri H.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner, has raised following points: -

(3.) BY drawing attention of this Court to the order sheet dated 2.8.2013 (Annexure P/1A), it is contended that it is the Prescribed Authority, who has to satisfy itself. The motion has to be moved before the Prescribed Authority. Since it was moved before the Collector and, in due course, sent to the SDO, by no stretch of imagination, it fulfills the requirement of rule 3 of the Rules. It is further submitted that the document dated 25.7.2013 shows that the said representation/no -confidence was in fact submitted before the Collector. The attention is drawn on the application dated 23.7.2013 preferred before the Collector by the Panchas. On the strength of these documents, it is urged that the No -confidence motion is, in fact, preferred before the Collector, which was sent by the said authority before the SDO. Thus, on the strength of these documents, the impugned notice is incorrectly issued. There is a serious procedural flaw in the order and, therefore, the order is liable to be interfered with.