MUSTAKIM HOSSAIN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - The petitioner appellant Mustakim has come up against an order dated 13.6.97 passed by the learned trial Judge when the writ application suffered a dismissal on the ground that no bar has been encompassed by the West Bengal Panchayat Act to hold the meeting for removal and adoption of a resolution within six months, by the reason of failure to hold the meeting dated 19.12.96 for not been legally convened.

(2.) In the background of the above, it will be unnecessary to give an account of the entire factual exposure of the case save necessary. The Dadpur Gram Panchayat is consisted of 25 members of which the petitioner appellant was the captain of the said Gram Panchayat, namely the Pradhan. However, for the prolonged absence in the meeting of two members in the Gram Panchayat, it bent upon cancellation of the membership.

(3.) The proposal for the removal of the Pradhan, therefore, became a consequential act as the above members flew into rage. The warring groups fell out against each other and went through a spate of litigations to sustain their rival claim. Ultimately, the Director of Panchayat by his Memo No. 777/III/VP/6A-1/1997 dated 6.3.97 intimated the Block Development Officer, Barasat-2 on the strength of the proviso appended to section 12 of the Act that no other meeting could be convened, if the meeting is not held for the removal of the office bearer within six months from the date of appointed such meeting which became all sore in this litigation. A status quo order sprang up and spirally reached the court of his Lordship, the Hon'ble Justice Altamas Kabir where the Hon'ble Court dismissed the writ application hereinbefore quoted in the preface of this order or judgment.