117 THE HIGH COUT 01“ JUDICLETURE §T BIM¥$PUR C1‘$&%T1‘ISG&PJ% o. (Ué 7 0F200 R WgP. N 1 Nohar Singh s/o Chedu ‘Ram Dhobi, UP $arac pnh Gram panchayat Chibarra , Tah. & Distt‘. M&he samum Chhattisgarh) E’etitionera? v St . Mitt i1 a Ba i at ‘ & Sarpanch , Gram panchgyat hibarra, Tah. Distt. Maha samuna ollector, Maha samund , D istt‘. Maha samtmd a Sub— DivisiQnal Officer Cdm9‘tent Officer ( panchayat) Mahasamumi 9 Sri K. R. Bhaga t Adéit iona l Tahs i1 da r h Pithora, pressiding Officer,’ Gram p§nchayat h‘ibarra Th. & Bist. Mahasamund (C.G.‘)‘ R£T£§TI2IQNQD§R ;A&T%Em2&64 2&1933 T *Cowgwg " g? _J;ND%. m i ( C / ’ G g t EJ 3 mg ‘ § v XI—Hc-22 U: WWWW @ Heald. The petitioner Nohar Singi Panchayat - Chibana, Tahsil and this wn't petition under Article 22‘ against the Older dated 4.6.2001 in Panchayat Case No.‘ 37]B-121 o ‘dated ’12.4.2001 passed by Authority, Pithora on the no—confirl “The Respondent No.1 is Tahsil and District— Mahasamun against the Respondent No.1 Panchayat Chihna for consideratio The Glam Panchayat consists of/t in the ‘presenceof Shri K. R. Bhaga ' 19 panchas, 17 panchas participa L, who is Up Sarpanch of Gram District— Mahasamund has prefemd 36/227 of the Consu’mu'on ‘osf India- sed, by the Collector, Mahasamund 2000—200 1’,“ arising out of the order Additional Tahsildar/ Competent ce motion. nch of Gmm Pmchayat, Chibarm, ‘no confidence motion’ was moved the meeting of panohas of Gmm of mou'on was hxedon 12.4.2001. .19 panchas. Said meeting was held Additional Tahsildapiu which out of out of whirh 13 panchas voted in and 4 panchas voted against the ‘no- Additional Tahsildar held that the Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swamj vour of the ‘no-coniidence motion’ conddence' motion’. After voting th drst condiu'on of Sccn‘c'm 21(1) of Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short the ‘Ac c ’) was satisned whereas the second ondition was not. satisfxed, there W 1e the ‘no confidence motion’ was twig d. o e s a e ‘ W WW.P.0.7(W 1031 200 raw m w Wm W 11%?! mmm tr%a W? é»-W afawm w tram 12]8]2004 Smt. Renu Kocher, counsel for the Petitioner. Shri Ravish Verma, counsel f r the Rcspondent No. 1. Shn' Bhaskar Pyasi, Panel 1a er for the Stats] Respondents No. 2 and 3. .4.200L passed by the Additional &1ence motion’, the peh'h‘rmer {$1M 2000‘2001 befom the Collector, Mahasamund. Vida order dated 4‘ .2001 leaned Conccmr ammmd the order passed by the leaxned Addit Tahsildar. I have heaxd learned counsel or the pafn'ts‘ Secu‘on 2‘1 bf the Act pr Sarpan’ch énd Up-Sarpanch. Sub “On a moh‘on 0f no-crmfgdcncc Against the Older dated Tahsildar on the proceeding of ‘no Panchayat Case No. 37/B—121 passed by the Gram Panchayat by a W msoluuon passed by majonty of not hss than thme fourth of the panchas present and votmg and s ch mawnty 1s mom than two thud of I the total number of Panr‘has con ‘tuhpg the Gram Panchayat for the time being, the Sarpanch or yp I passed, shail cease to hold o$ce f provision reveak that them axe two h against whom such motion is ith.» ‘ ‘ A bait reading of the afo Iequjrement of this section'- (i) MaJonty of not less than three forth of the panchas pmsent and votmg U (ii) (Such majority is more than two third of the total number of Learned Panchas counsel constituting for the vpeti Ki ‘ ner Gram submits Panchayat that for’the as the time strength being. of the Gram Panchayat was 19 and on the date of ‘no-conhdence motion’ 17' L-e~ favour panchas of were ‘no conhdencc present and moh'on’ partici :i d 4 invoting; voted against out of the them ‘no 13 confidence [voted in, niotion’, therefore as per the requirement of nut part of Seoh’on 21(1) of f n i o ' - b ' 1 - - o m w c he resolution in favour of the ‘no- bxnits that the second requimment of fmore than 2/ 3rd of the total number anchayat for the time being; and as al panchas of 19 comes to 12.66, of the ‘no— confidence mou'on’ which uirement was also satisfied. Thus, the Collector axe not in conformity ) of the Act. el for the respondents wgued that comes to 12.66, ithas to be read inefnent of second part of Section 14 panchas should have voted in ion’, then and then only the “no— ueated as ‘passed’. As far as the 111st part ’of Section 21(1) of the Act is concerned, n'es. The only dispute is about second the Act, 3/4‘“ majon‘ty passcd t con$ence motion’. Shs further su the provision is that the majority o of panchas constituting the Gram per this mquimmcnt 2/ 3’5 of tho whereas 13 panchas voted in fav is more than 2/3’d themfom this the order of the Tahsildar as well with the requirement of Secb‘on 21( On the other hand learned c 2/3‘d of total 19 panchas even th as 13 'and in cider to meet the. 21(1) of the Act it was necessary favour of the ‘no confidence mm confidence motion’ could have been there is no dispute between the pan p811 of the above provision. On the mlevant date i.c. 1 consisting of 19 panchas and 2/3“ to treat the Iesolution as ‘passed’, favour of the ‘no conhdence motm'ni panchas voted in favour of the ‘no opinion the mquhement of second 1 the 13,nninber is more than the It i 2.42001 the Gram Panchayat was of the same comes to 12.66. 1n order the number of panchas who voted in Should be 12.66 and in this mse 13 conhdence moh'on’, therefore in my s )art of the provision was sah’sncd, a quired number of 12.66. In order to o o o t q n s t satisfy this requimment even the haction of member cannot be ignomd ie. in this Name .34 was mom than thP mqnirPd number of 12.66 i.e. 2/3r‘1 of the total strength of the panchas of the (ham Panchayat. As such, the ordcr passcd by the Tahsildar as well as the impugmd order ‘ passed by, the Icamed Collectcr is not in accordance with the 'V requixem’ent of sub-section (1) of tion 21 of the Act, which canhot be sustained and liable to be set asirie ‘ In view of the above d‘ ussion, the impugned rder dated o 4 6 2001 passed by the Collector Mahasamund m Panchayat Case No "1‘ 37/ B—121 of 2000—2001 ansmg o t of the order dated 12 4 2001 passed by the Addmonal Tahsddar/Com tent Authonty, Plthora on the no— confldence motion are quashed; thry axe directed to act accordmgly With the above obsetvau'onu anddirections this petition stands dlsposcd of e In v1ew of the above onier M(W)P No. 1241/2002 and I.A.No. 866/ 2004 stand dlsposed of. . Ceru‘hed copy, as per Rules. *’“ sw— L.C.BHADOO x Judge