SABEITUO MECHULHO Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.N. Mozhui, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. S. Mere, learned Government Advocate for the State respondent as well as Mr. N.M. Jamir, learned counsel for the respondent No.6.

(2.) By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the letter bearing No. DCK/SDR/VC/CHE/03/2016(Pt)/1374 dated 18.06.2018 issued by the respondent No.5, directing the respondent No.6 to convene meeting of the village council and also for direction in the form of appropriate writ to the Deputy Commissioner (respondent No.3) to convene a special session of the Chedema Village Council.

(3.) The petitioners herein are the members of the Chedema Village Council as well as the Gaonburhas who are also ex-officio members of the village council having voting right. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioner No.1, 2, 3 and 4 filed a representation before the respondent No.4, SDO (S), Kohima on 15.09.2017 bringing some allegations against the respondent No.6, being the Chairman of the Chedema Village Council and also asking for summoning a special sessions of the village council in order to enable them to move a no-confidence motion against the Chairman (respondent No.6). As no action was taken by the respondent, the petitioners submitted a representation on 18.11.2017, whereby, a special session of the Chedema Village Council was sought to be convened in order to facilitate the council members to move a no-confidence motion against the Chairman. However, the respondent No.3 or 4 did not summon any special session of the village council as required by Section 9 (3) (c) of the Nagaland Village Council Act, 1978 as amended by Act No.2 of 2010 (for short 'the Act'), rather, by the impugned letter dated 18.06.2018, the respondent No.5 directed the respondent No.6 to convene the meeting of the village council.