WP(C) 3993/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Roy, learne d State counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5. The petitioner, by the present petition, has challenged the notice dated 25.7.20 11 issued by eleven members of Gauripur Anchalik Panchayat expressing want of co nfidence on the petitioner as the president of the said Anchalik Panchayat. It has been submitted by Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner that on e of the members has informed him and has also filed an affidavit that he never signed any such no confidence motion against the petitioner. The learned counsel submits it is, therefore, doubtful whether the other members have singed the no confidence motion or not. The learned counsel further submits that since one of the members has stated on oath that he has not signed the no confidence motion it renders the entire notice invalid. It appears from the notice dated 25.7.2011 that eleven members of the Anchalik P anchayat singed the said notice expressing want of confidence on the petitioner. Even if one person has informed the petitioner and filed an affidavit that he i s not a signatory to the said notice, it would not make the said notice invalid as the signature of the ten members are still there in the said notice, when suc h notice is required to be given by 1/3 of the total members of the Anchalik Pan chayat, here in this case 5(five). That apart if any of the members did not put his signature in the said notice that can be raised in the meeting to be held pu rsuant to such notice dated 25.7.2011. The grounds on which the petitioner has challenged the notice cannot be the grou nd to stall the democratic process. In view of the above, I do not find any merit to entertain the writ petition and hence the writ petition is dismissed. No cost.