VIDHU BHARGAVA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner had been elected as Pradhan of Panchayat Samiti Khairabad District Kota, who has been removed from this post by virtue of a no confidence motion which had been passed against her as the motion had been supported by the majority of the members of the Panchayat Samiti. THE petitioner has challenged this no confidence motion on several grounds on which a show cause notice was issue to the respondents, in response to which, the respondents also are represented by their advocates.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner Shri A. K. Bhargava first of all contended that no confidence motion which was passed against the petitioner is fit to be quashed and set aside as to no confidence motion had not been presented before the competent authority of the Panchayat Samiti, who was the Chief Executive Officer of Zila Parishad and in support of his contention he relied upon a judgment reported in 1998 (2) WLC 546 delivered in the case of Smt. Manjula vs. State of Rajasthan & others wherein the learned Single Judge had been pleased to hold that if the notice was required to be given by the Executive Officer and the same was delegated to a lower authority, then there should be a gazette notification to that effect indicating delegation of the authority to the Additional Chief Executive Officer. Elaborating on this, it was further contended by the petitioner's advocate that even if the Additional Chief Executive Officer had been delegated this authority without the notification in this regard, adequate reasons should have been recorded by the Chief Executive Officer before permitting him to conduct the meeting for the no confidence motion. Apart from this principal contention, it was also urged that the no confidence motion was signed thrice by some of the members and the number of the voters were shown to be 32 although only 23 in all were the members of the Panchayat Samiti.

(3.) SINCE no confidence motion could not be assailed on any of the grounds urged on behalf of the petitioner, it is difficult to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, it stands dismissed at the admission stage also. .