HUKAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by Hukamsingh, seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) Initially facts first. The petitioner is the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Digarna and as such is a member of panchayat Samiti, Jaitaran, which consists of 35 members. He was Up-Fradhan of the Panchayat Samiti. Juitaran. It has been stated that a no-confidance motion Ex. P-2 dated Jan. 11, 1983 was presented on Jan. 25, 1983 and was delivered to the Collector. Pali (non-petitioner No. 2). Non-petitioner No. 2. Collector, Pali issued notice to the members of the Panchayat Samiti. Jaitaran on Jan. 29, 1983. The notices were also issued to the co-opted members of the Panchayat Samiti. Jaitaran. After receipt of the notice, the petitioner filed S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 375 of 1983 for restraining non-petitioner no. 2 from holding the meeting. The writ petition was dismissed summarily on Fab. 8, 1983 as premature. In that order, it was observed by the learned Judge that it would be open to the petitioner to raise all objections before the appropriate authority, and that the concerned authority shall take note of the objections made by the petitioner and decide whether the persons to whom notices have been issued have a right of vote. After that, the Collector, Pali authorised Additional Collector (non-petitioner No. 3) to preside over the meeting. On Feb. 14, 1983 at about 1 p. m., the Additional Collector (non-petitioner No. 3) started to arrange for the consideration of the motion of no-confidence. It is alleged by the petitioner that Shri Gokulchand, Officer Assistant. Office of the Additional Collector. Pali-Marwar (non-petitioner No. 5) obtained signatures of 34 members of the Pancliayat Samiti, Jaitaran on minutes of proceedings. The petitioner gave objections Ex. P-8 on that day at about 1 P. m, One of the objections was that co-opted members should not he allowed to cast vote at the meeting. Another application was filed on that day which is Ex. P9. In that application two objections which are relevant, were taken: (i) that the voting should be by secret ballot and (ii) that non-petitioner no. 4 by exercising undue pressure and influence on the members wants to get the no-confidence motion passed against the petitioner by show of hands. The objections were decided by the Additional Collector against the petitioner vide Ex. P-10 and after 3.10 P.m. the Additional Collector called upon the members to sign the minutes of proceedings. As the procedure of obtaining the, signatures was unusual, the petitioner has stated that six members including himself walked out. The no-confidence motion was carried out. The petitioner has filed the writ petition for quashing the no-confidence motion Ex. P-10 dated Feb. 14, 1983 and also for a direct on to the Collector. Pali for convening the meeting in accordance with the provisions of the Act. A prayer was also made that sub- Section (8) of Section 39 of the Act may be declared null and void. The writ petition was filed on March 1, 1983.

(3.) Mr. L. R. Mehta lodged caveat on behalf of non-petitioner No. 6 Suraram, pradhan, Panchayat Samiti. Jaitaran. A reply was filed on his behalf. Subsequently, an application was moved by the learned counsel for the petitioner praying that the Panchayat Samiti. Jaitaran may be added as non- petitioner No. 38. This Court, by its order dated March 23, 1983 ordered for addition of the Panchayat Samiti. Jaitaran as non-petitioner No. 38 in the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not seek any consequential amendments in the writ petition.