(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner, who has been the elected as the Chairman of Karlamunda Panchayat Samiti in the district of Kalahandi, has prayed to quash the initiation of "No Confidence Motion" under Section 46-B of the Orissa Panchayat Samiti Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act" for brevity) on the ground that the procedure adopted by the Sub-Collector, Bhawanipatna, opposite party no.2, is defective and in contravention of the statutory provisions of the Act as well as violative of the circular No.31535 dated 30.9.2009 of the State Government in the Department of Panchayati Raj as well as the circular issued by the Central Government.
(2.) The petitioner is the elected Chairman of Karlamunda Panchayat Samiti in the election held in the year 2012. She submits that on 7.5.2015 in the morning hours she has gone to the Block Office and on her return to her house in the afternoon, she found photo copy of letter issued by opposite party no.2 vide No. 1922 (27), dated 4.5.2015. On query, she was informed that one person has come allegedly from the Block Office to serve the letter on being instructed by the G.P.O. The petitioner could know from the contents of the letter that opposite party no.2 requested her to remain present on 13.5.2015 at 11 A.M. at Karlamunda Panchayat Office to take part in the "No Confidence Motion" initiated against her at the instance of some members.
(3.) After coming to know contents of the document she made queries from other members like Sarpanches and some members of the Panchayat Samiti, but they expresses their ignorance regarding any such "No Confidence Motion". The petitioner pleads that as per Government Circular while Lok Sabha or Assembly is in Session, no proceeding for no confidence motion under G.P. Act, Panchayat Samiti Act or Municipal Act can be initiated. It is further submitted that as Lok Sabha was going on, the aforesaid motion is bad in law and is liable to be set aside. She further pleaded that Lok Sabha Sessions started from 23rd February 2015 till 8th May, 2015. Subsequently, the Session extended till 13th May, 2015. The second plea raised by the petitioner is that the provisions of the Act, especially Section 46-B of the said Act, notice of "No Confidence Motion" should be appended with the proposed resolution. In the instant case, opposite party no.2 has not send the original notice along with the proposed resolution. Therefore, it is stated that the action of opposite party no.2 is violative of the provisions of the Act. It is further stated that opposite party no.2 has singed the notice on 2.5.2015, but the same was issued by the office of opposite party no.2 on 4.5.2015 and was sent to the house of the petitioner on 7.5.2015 directing the petitioner to remain present on 13.5.2015 to discuss and cast vote in the motion. Therefore, the petitioner is apprehending some foul play with regard to service of notice to the members to cast vote in the motion and she apprehends that every chance of tampering her signature as well as signature of other members to fulfil the ill motives of the opponents. Thus, her specific case is that initiation of the motion is based on fraud and misrepresentation of the facts at the instance of the members of the ruling party and hence the entire proceeding has been initiated by few members and the petitioner was not aware of the alleged proposed resolution. It is further claimed that at the time of "No Confidence Motion" the presence of local M.L.A. and M.P. or their representatives are required. Therefore as per Circular No.31535 dated 30.9.2009 issued by the State in P.R. Department, "No Confidence Motion" cannot be issued or initiated while assembly or parliament is in session. In the instant case, the said circular has been violated. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed that the notice issued by opposite party no.2, i.e. Annexure-1, for holding of the "No Confidence Motion" against her should be quashed.