SEEMA SARKAR versus EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ORS.

SEEMA SARKAR versus EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ORS.

The quorum and voting for a motion of no confidence against the Pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti must be calculated based on the 'total number of members' of the Panchayat Samiti, inclusive of directly elected and ex-officio members. As only three members were present instead of the required four (two-thirds of six), the Executive Officer's decision to dissolve the meeting for want of quorum was correct. Ex-officio members, including the MP, are entitled to vote unless expressly excluded by statute, which is not the case in this Regulation and Rules.

Parties
Appellant: Seema Sarkar; Respondents: Executive Officer and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Statutes, Motion of No Confidence, Panchayat Samiti Quorum, Voting Rights of Ex Officio Members
Constitutional Law Local Government Law Interpretation of Statutes Motion of No Confidence Panchayat Samiti Quorum Voting Rights of Ex Officio Members

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seema Sarkar

Appellant

Executive Officer and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Member of Parliament representing Andaman and Nicobar Islands, as an ex-officio member of the Panchayat Samiti, should be included for reckoning the quorum and voting at a special meeting regarding motion of no confidence against the Pramukh of the Little Andaman Panchayat Samiti

Ratio Decidendi

The quorum and voting for a motion of no confidence against the Pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti must be calculated based on the 'total number of members' of the Panchayat Samiti, inclusive of directly elected and ex-officio members. As only three members were present instead of the required four (two-thirds of six), the Executive Officer's decision to dissolve the meeting for want of quorum was correct. Ex-officio members, including the MP, are entitled to vote unless expressly excluded by statute, which is not the case in this Regulation and Rules.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned High Court judgment set aside
  • Writ petition filed by respondent No.6 dismissed