RAM PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Ram Prasad against whom the Collector, Bhilwara passed the impugned order dated 20th August, 1975 (Annexure 3) whereby he directed the petitioner to tender his resignation from the office of Upsarpanch, Panchayat Gulabpura within three days and in case he failed to do so, he would be removed from the office. THIS order was passed on the ground that a motion of no confidence had been carried out against the petitioner by a majority of 7 Panchas out of the total number of 13 Panchas said to be holding office at the relevant time The petition has been opposed by the State of Rajasthan only.

(2.) THE sole point arising in the case is whether the no-confidence motion has been validly passed against the petitioner. THEre were in all 17 members of the Panchayat, Gulabpura, out of whom admittedly two had died and one has resigned. THE Sarpanch Ummedsingh has been admittedly elected as a Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti, Gulabpura. THE Tehsildar who presided over the meeting summoned for consideration of the no-confidence motion was of the opinion, that Ummedsingh even though he has been elected as Pradhan would still be considered as a member of the Panchayat. Seven votes were cast in favour of the motion and since the total number of the Panchas including the Sarpanch according to the Tehsildar was 14, he held that the motion was lost. However, when the matter was referred to the Collector, Bhilwara, he held that Ummedsingh Sarpanch having been elected as Pradhan of the Panchayat Samiti would no longer be considered as a member of the Panchayat. In this view of the matter, he came to the conclusion that there were only 13 members of the Panchayat at the relevant time and since 7 had cast their votes in favour of the no confidence motion, the motion must be taken to have passed. Consequently he passed the impugned order for removal of the petitioner.

(3.) THERE is yet another aspect of the matter and it is this that the Up-Sarpanch no doubt performs the functions of the Sarpanch when the Sarpanch of that Panchayat is elected as the Pradhan or the Pramukh, as the case may be, but he cannot claim all the privileges of the Sarpanch inasmuch as he cannot say that the motion of no-confidence can be said to be passed against him only by not less then 3/4th of the total number of members of the Panchayat. The office of the Sarpanch must be, therefore, deemed to be held, though with certain restrictions on his rights, by she Sarpanch only even though he has been elected as the Pradhan.