PANAJI
The Bombay High Court at Goa has stayed the order of the additional director of Panchayats who had by way of an ex-parte order suspending the no confidence motion that was passed against the incumbent sarpanch of the Village Panchayat of Siridao-Pale terming the order passed by the additional Director was “an example of clear perversity.”
Sarpanch for Siridao village panchayat was ousted through a motion of no confidence moved by four of the seven members of the panchayat who moved a motion of no confidence against him. However the opposite camp approached the Directorate of Panchayats and secured an order suspending the resolution passed at the meeting and restoring the former sarpanch to his post.
The High Court has now overruled him.
“There is at least prima facie nothing unjust, unlawful, or improper in the motion of no confidence that was passed on 30.07.2021,” the High Court said.
“The Additional Directors, prima facie, finding that these Rules are not followed, is a clear case of perverse finding which no reasonable person instructed in law could have ever recorded. Besides, the Additional Director has shown scant regard to democratic principles which must inform all such matters,” the High Court ruled.
“The Additional Director has then found fault with the motion because the minutes were recorded in a notebook and not in the minutes' books. There is nothing illegal or irregular in the record of minutes in a notebook having regard to the circumstances in which the same were recorded,” the High Court ruled.
“To insist that despite this the minutes should have been recorded in the official minutes' book, is again, an example of clear perversity,” the High Court said.
On the day that the meeting, the members of the village panchayat were shocked to find that some ‘unknown’ persons had put an unauthorised lock on the panchayat and the premises of the panchayat was guarded by the police who declined to allow the members to break the unauthorised lock claiming that the matter was under investigation and the panchanama needed to be conducted.
“The facts in this Petition indicate an extremely disturbing incident, by which, the democratic process has been subverted in a bid to enable to continue as the Sarpanch of Siridao-Pale, even though this Sarpanch has clearly lost the confidence of the majority of the members in the Panchayat,” Justice Mahesh Sonak said in his order.
When the Petitioners (four members of the Panchayat who moved the motion of no confidence) reached thePanchayat Office on 30.07.2021 before 11 am to attend the special meeting to consider the motion of no confidence, they found that there was a lock put on the door/shutter of the Panchayat office. They also found that police were present at the Panchayat office.
“They (petitioners) requested the police to allow them or rather to allow the Secretary to break open the lock and to enter into the Panchayat office so that the special meeting could be held. However, the police did not permit the breaking of the lock on the specious plea that a panchnama has to be carried out,” the High Court observed.
Faced with the situation, the members of the panchayat who moved a motion of no confidence requested the panchayat secretary who was appointed as an observer to conduct the meeting since in the verandah of the panchayat office in Democracy the People will is important and not the walls of the Panchayat.”
The meeting was conducted and the sarpanch was voted out of office. The minutes were recorded in a notebook since, the official minute books, stamps, etc., were inside the Panchayat office.
Aggrieved by the decision the other three members of the village panchayat approached the office of the Directorate of Panchayats claiming that the sarpanch was voted out through an ‘illegal’ meeting.
In his order, the additional Director suspended the motion of no confidence and allowed the incumbent sarpanch to continue as sarpanch.
“Prima-facie it is found that Rule 6 of the Goa Panchayats (Meeting) Rules, 1996 is not followed upon… The minutes for passing the resolution are recorded on note book and not in the minutes book maintained for the purpose, the said resolution is also not signed by the Observer appointed to Observe the meeting on No Confidence Motion moved by the four members of Village Panchayat Siridao Palem. The present petition filed by the Petitioner deserves to be allowed… the Impugned resolution is hereby suspended….” the additional director had ordered.
“The order made by the Additional Director of Panchayat is stayed. The effect of the stay is that shall forthwith cease to be the Sarpanch and any attempt on the part of to act as a Sarpanch of this Panchayat will have to be dealt with seriously by the Director of Panchayat or the Additional Director of Panchayat… The Deputy Sarpanch will be entitled to exercise the powers to perform the duties of the Sarpanch until a Sarpanch is duly elected,” the High Court ruled.
