M.R. Sharma, J. - (1.) THE petitioners are the elected panches of Gram Panchayat Jatti Kalan. Respondent No. 3 is the Sarpanch of the said Panchayat. The Panchayat consisted of eight numbers, i.e. one sarpanch and seven Panches. Five Panches applied to the Director of Panchayats for permission to consider a no -confidence resolution against the Sarpanch. The meeting meant for no -confidence resolution was postponed for one or two occasions. Upon this the petitioners filed a writ petition (C.W. 1657 of 1973 Jai Pal Singh etc. v. State of Haryana etc.) when this petition came UP for hearing before Motion Bench, it was disclosed on behalf of the Director of Panchayats that the held meeting had already been held on June 30, 1973 Consequently, the Motion Bench dismissed the petition as infructuous on July 16, 1973.
(2.) IN the meeting held on June 30, 1973, no -confidence resolution was carried out by a majority of four members out of seven Panches against respondent No. 3. By that time one of the Panches had passed away and the Gram Panchayat consisted of one Sarpanch and six Panches. The information regarding the Majority by which this resolution bad been passed was conveyed to the Director of Panchayats. Inspite of that he did not approve the resolution so that respondent No. 3 could be deemed to have been removed from the post of Sarpanch. In the return filed on behalf of the Director of Panchayats it has been stated that the Gram Panchayat was constituted by one Sarpanch and seven Panches and the no -confidence resolution should have been passed by a majority of five against three or five against two. Since resolution had the support of four members, it could be deemed to have been passed by majority if the Panchayat were deemed to have been constituted by eight members. In nay considered opinion, the plea raised in the written statement is wholly untenable. The proviso to section 9 (2) of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act) reads as under : - - 9. (2) The Sarpanch and Panches shall hold office for a period of five years. * * * * Provided further that subject to the approval of the Director, the Sarpanch may be removed from his office by a majority of the votes of the Panches constituting the Gram Panchayat at its extraordinary general mating held with previous permission of the Director. The word 'constituting' appearing in the proviso means 'constituting for the time being'. If one member of the Panchayat passes away, than till such time as his vacancy is not filled in by holding an election, the Panchayat would be deemed to be constituted by one member less than the number by which it was originally constituted. This interpretation finds support from a reading of section 10 of the Act which snows that in case of a vacancy by death, resignation or removal fresh election would be held and the person so elected would hold office till the lifetime of the original Gram Panchayat. In my considered opinion, respondent No. 1 was not well advised to withhold approval of the resolution of no -confidence passed by the petitioners and their companions.
(3.) FOR the reasons mentioned above, this petition deserves to succeed and 1 order accordingly.;