1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3043/09 Smt. Kalpna Kala vs. The District Collector, Jhalawar & Ors. Date of order : 15/4/2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Dinesh Kala for the petitioner. ****** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Dinesh Kala, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was Sarpanch and against him no confidence motion was carried out in a meeting, which was illegally convened by the District Collector. It is contended that the resolution dated 13.2.09 by which the Gram Panchayat resolved to remove the petitioner on 13.2.09 on the ground that no confidence motion is illegal because the petitioner had made a complaint against two members namely Ramesh Chand Saini and Smt. Shaitan Bai that they had already incurred disqualification under Section 19(l) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act having had third child born after the cut off date and third member 2 Harish Kumar was convicted vide Annexure-5 dated 7.1.09. I am afraid such a submission cannot be accepted in view of the specific provision contained in Section 39 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, which provides the mode of Cessation of membership. Sub-section (1) of section 39 provides that a member of a Panchayati Raj Institution shall not eligible to continue to be such member if he is or becomes subject to any of the disqualifications specified in Section 19. Both the disqualifications mentioned by the petitioner are covered by Section 19. But then sub-section (2) of Section 39 provides that whenever it is made to appear to the competent authority that a member has become ineligible to continue to be a member for any of the reasons specified in Sub-section (1), the concerned authority may, after giving him an opportunity of being heard, declare him to have become so ineligible and thereupon he shall vacate his office as such member. Proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 39 has safeguarded for the situation like this. It states that until a 3 declaration under this sub-section is made, such member shall continue to hold the office. In view of this, I do not find any merit in this writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/