WP(C) 5669/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P.K. MUSAHARY Heard Mr. A.K. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mrs . V.L. Singh, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for respondent Nos. 1,2,3 and 5. Mr. FKR Ahmed, learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 8,10 and 14. There is no representation for other respondents. The petitioner challenges the requisition notice dated 23.08/2010 and subsequent resolution adopted in the meeting held on 20.09.2010 and communication dated 20 .09.2010 issued by the Executive Officer of the Paka Betbari Anchalik Panchayat respondent No. 5. The short point involved in this case is whether the no confidence motion was mo ved and passed against the petitioner as per the provision u/s. 15(1) of the Ass am Panchayat Act, 1994. In the aforesaid provision the President or the Vice Pre sident of the Panchayat can be removed from office by a ’No Confidence Motion’ a dopted and passed by a majority of 2/3rd of the total members of the Panchayat. The Rules require that the meeting should be convened within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of notice and if the President of the Gaon Panchayat r efuses to toaccord approval to convening the special meeting for no confidence m otion, the Secretary of the Panchayat shall, within 3 days, refer the matter to the President of the Anchalik Panchayat requesting him to convene the meeting. In the present case, a notice for No Confidence Motion was signed by 8 members a nd delivered the same to the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat on 23.08.2010. Th e Gaon Panchayat Secretary. Respondent No. 6, referred the matter to the Preside nt of the Anchalik Panchayat on 14.9.2010 requesting him to convene a meeting fo r discussion and adoption of resolution. The No Confidence Motion, after discuss ion, was passed by a required majority and in presence of the aforesaid members the proceeding of the meeting was forwarded to the President. On the basis of th e aforesaid No Confidence Motion passed in the said meeting, the petitioner sto od removed from the office of the President of Gaon Panchayat. The only question that is to be decided is whether the notice for no confidence motion addressed to the Secretary of the Gaon Panchayat was brought to the personal knowledge o f the President and if it was brought to his knowledge whether he refused to acc ord approval to convening the Special Meeting as required under the Panchayat Ac t. The respondent Gaon Panchayat Secretary has not filed any response clarifying th e position as to whether after he received the No Confidence Motion notice from the members concerned, he placed the same before the petitioner as President of the Gaon Panchayat. Mrs. V.L. Singh, learned Jr. Govt. Advocate has produced the relevant record in origin from the Gaon Panchayat. I have carefully gone through the record. It is found that as many as 8 members signed the notice on 23.8.2010 and it was delive red to the Gaon Panchayat Secretary. On the top of the notice he put his initia l with date i.e. 27.08.2010. The file contains note sheets from page 1 to 14 on which office notes are put up by the Secretary and orders are passed by the Pres ident. In the aforesaid note sheets, the Gaon Panchayat Secretary has not put up the aforesaid No Confidence Motion notice to obtain necessary orders from the P resident. There is no initial on the aforesaid notice as a mark of bringing the matter to the notice of the petitioner. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was appraised of the No Confidence Motion notice sent by some mem bers of the Gaon Panchayat. In absence of such material it cannot be said that t he President had any personal knowledge about the same. Officially he was not at all intimated. It is the statutory requirement that the notice of No Confidence Motion should be brought to the notice of the President of the Gaon Panchayat a nd the President has to accord approval. It is the provision of law that if the President does not give his approval within 15 days, the Gaon Panchayat Presiden t is authorized to refer the matter to the Anchalik Panchayat President after 3 days from the date of expiry of 15 days. The Gaon Panchayat Secretary admittedly referred the matter to the President of the Anchalik Panchayat on 14.9.2010 i.e. after expiry of 18 days after withdrawi ng the said notice from the President to overcome the technicality. The record h as revealed the truth. It has been established that the matter was referred to t he President of the Anchalik Panchayat without complying with the statutory prov ision u/s. 15 of the Panchayat Act. The No Confidence Motion, no doubt, was pass ed against the petitioner but it is non-est in the eye of law inasmuch as the pr ocedure required to be followed have not been followed and the consequential rem oval from the office of President of the Gaon Panchayat cannot be sustained und er the law. In view of the above the impugned action in referring the matter to the Anchalik Panchayat President and the adoption of No Confidence Motion against the petiti oner would be invalid. The President shall not stand removed from his office. Ac cordingly the impugned resolution dated 20.9.2010 and the consequential resoluti on shall stand set aside and quashed. Petition stands allowed. No costs. The petitioner shall be allowed to resume his office of President of the Gaon Pa nchayat with his usual powers and functions.