CWP No. 12310 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 12310 of 2011 Date of Decision: 15.7.2011. Charanjit Kaur .......Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Aman Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... SABINA, J. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the official respondents to convene a meeting of the Gram Sabha with regard to 'no confidence motion' against the Sarpanch. The case of the petitioner as stated in the petition in brief is that members of the Gram Panchayat of village Babbanpur were elected on 29.5.2008. Thereafter, respondent No.5 was elected as a Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat on 17.7.2008. Later on, it transpired that respondent No.5 was not working for the welfare of the village. On 26.8.2010, an application was moved against the Sarpanch qua 'no confidence motion' under Section 19 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred as Act). A meeting was held by respondent No. 4 on 14.9.2010 with regard to 'no confidence motion' of the CWP No. 12310 of 2011 -2- Sarpanch but the respondent No.5 failed to appear in the meeting and the same was postponed to 21.9.2010. Vide order dated 22.9.2010, respondent No.5 was removed from the post of Sarpanch. However, the election for the post of Sarpanch was not held by the official respondents. The petitioner filed a Civil Writ Petition No. 21742 of 2010 and the said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 7.12.2010. A review application was filed in the said petition and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 8.3.2011. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant appeal deserves dismissal. In Civil Writ Petition No. 21742 of 2010 following order (Annexure P-7) was passed by this court:- 'With the consent of Mr. Satish Bhanot, Addl. A.G. Punjab, present petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. In the present petition, Sarpanch-petitioner has assumed office of the Sarpanch on 26.8.2008 while application to convene a meeting of the Gram Panchayat for discussing and taking decision on the no confidence motion was moved on 26.8.2010. Section 19 of the Punjab Panchayati Raj Act reads as under:- “19. Non-Confidence motion against Sarpanch.- (1) An application regarding intention to move a motion of non-confidence against a Sarpanch be made to the Block Development and Panchayat Officer by a CWP No. 12310 of 2011 -3- majority of Panches. Provided that no such application shall be made unless a period of two years has elapsed from the date on which the Sarpanch assumed his office. (2) The Block Development and Panchayat Officer shall, within a period of fifteen days of the receipt of application under sub-section (1), convene a meeting of the Gram Panchayat by giving seven clear days in notice, for discussing and taking decision on the no-confidence motion. (3) If the non-confidence motion is carried in the meeting convened under sub-section (2) which shall be presided over by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer or an officer not below the rank of Social Education and Panchayat Officer authorised by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer in this behalf, by a two-third majority of the total number of Panches holding office for the time being), the Sarpanch shall be deemed to have been removed from his office, and a new Sarpanch shall be elected in his placed: Provided that if the no-confidence motion is lost another such motion shall not be moved again that Sarpanch before the expiry of two years from the date of its having been lost.” CWP No. 12310 of 2011 -4- From the perusal of proviso to the Section 19, it is thus clear that application to convene meeting for no confidence motion can be moved only after expiry of two years from the date Sarpanch assumes office of the Sarpanch. Since petitioner has assumed office of Sapanch on 26.8.2008 and application to convene meeting was moved on 26.8.2010, hence, application seems to have been moved within two years and not after expiry of two years. In the opinion of this Court for the purpose of counting period of two years first day of assuming office and last day of the second year should be excluded in view of Section 9 of General Clauses Act. Thus, in the opinion of this Court after excluding 26.8.2008 and 26.8.2009 application could be moved only after 26.8.2009 and not before. Consequently, writ petition is allowed. Impugned meeting is quashed. However, it is made clear that respondent shall be at liberty to move fresh application in accordance with law and respondent shall be at liberty to pass order thereon in accordance with law. Petition stands disposed of.' On the review application, following order (Annexure P-9) was passed by this court:- “Learned counsel for the applicants states that since no confidence motion dated 26.8.2010 was quashed by this court observing it to be premature, now respondents are not accepting fresh no CWP No. 12310 of 2011 -5- confidence motion stating that no confidence motion can not be moved before the expiry of 2 years from 26.8.2010. In the opinion of this court 2 years' period of moving no confidence motion apply if first no confidence motion fails. In the present case no confidence motion was declared as premature. Application is misconceived; hence dismissed.” This court had, thus, quashed the impugned meeting, convened for 'no confidence motion' of respondent No.5 and had given a liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh application in accordance with law. However, now Section 19 of the Act has been omitted vide notification dated 21.4.2011. In these circumstances, at this stage no direction can be issued to the official respondents to convene a meeting on 'no confidence motion' of the Sarpanch-respondent No.5. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE July 15, 2011 Gurpreet