ABDUR RASHID SEIKH Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
LAWS(CAL)-2000-7-46
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on July 27,2000

Abdur Rashid Seikh Appellant
VERSUS
The State of West Bengal and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Prabir Kumar Samanta, J. - (1.) This writ petition is directed against the notice dated 13th July, 2000 issued by the ten members of Dadpur Gram Panchayat which is comprised of eighteen members in total, fixing the date of a requisition meeting on 27th July, 2000 for the purpose of removal of the Prodhan of the said Gram Panchayat, the petitioner herein.
(2.) Evidently, one-third members of the said Gram Panchayat required the Prodhan, the writ petitioner, to call a meeting of the aforesaid Gram Panchayat for the purpose of removal of the Prodhan. The said requisition was made by a letter dated 23rd of June, 2000. The writ petitioner, Prodhan himself admitted that he received the same on 27th of June, 2000. In these state of things the writ petitioner, Prodhan called the requisition meeting by a notice dated 19th July, 2000 by fixing the said meeting on 7th of August, 2000 whereas the requisitionists themselves fixed such requisition meeting on 27th of July, 2000 by issuing notice dated 13th July, 2000 which has been impugned in this writ petition. In the face of the aforesaid two notices, it was contended on behalf of the Prodhan, the writ petitioner, that the said requisitionists did not have power to call such meeting by the impugned notice dated 13th July, 2000 by fixing the date of meeting on 27th July, 2000, when such meeting had already been fixed by the Prodhan himself on 7th of August, 2000, by issuing a prior notice dated 10th of July, 2000.
(3.) Mr. Kalimuddin Mondal, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, upon reference to the provisions of second proviso to Section 16(1) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 contended that the notice fixing the date and hour of the meeting on 7th August, 2000 having been issued by the Prodhan within fifteen days from the date of receipt of requisition by him, the requisitionists themselves had no occasion to invoke the said provision to call such requisition meeting by fixing a date earlier to the date that was fixed by the Prodhan himself. In other words the power to call such meeting under the second part of second proviso to Section 16 (1) would vest to the requisitionists only in the event of failure of the Prodhan to call such meeting under the first part of the second proviso to Section 16(1).;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.