NIZAM UDDIN MAZUMDAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The challenge made herein is to the notice dated 28.2.2011 issued by the Secretary and Executive Officer, Hailakandi Anchalik Panchayat, Hailakandi convening a special meeting of the Boalipar Gaon Panchayat on 04.03.2011 for discus-sing the no-confidence motion against the President of the said Gaon Panchayat and the resolution of no-confidence dated 04.03.2011 adopted in the said meeting against the President of the said Gaon Panchayat.

(2.) THE facts of the case as would appear from the pleadings may be briefly stated at the very outset.

(3.) MR. Medhi, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the procedure prescribed in sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 15 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (briefly "the Act" hereafter) has not been followed in the present case and the same has vitiated the impugned notice and resolution.He further submits that the requisition of no-confidence was addressed to the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat and not to the President and that the said requisition dated 11.02.2011 was brought to the notice of the petitioner only on 26.02.2011. MR. Medhi further submits that there was also violation of Section 18(5) of the Act in much as the voting was not by secret ballot in the actual sense of the term. Stating that though ballots were used in the voting, it could not be termed as secret ballot in as much as there was no provision for separate compartment to ensure complete secrecy. Learned Counsel submits that secrecy in all respects has to be maintained so as to ensure the sanctity of the no-confidence proceeding. MR. Medhi, the learned Counsel refers to and relies on the following decisions of this Court in support of his submissions:-