T. Basave Gowda vs The Assistant Commissioner, Hunsur Sub-Division and Another

V. Gopala Gowda, J.—Petitioner is seeking to quash the impugned Notice at Annexure-B dated 7.6.2001 fixing the date of meeting on 27.6.2001 to consider the ''no confidence motion'' against the Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Byadarahalli Gram Panchayat. A further prayer is made to direct the first Respondent-Assistant Commissioner to adjourn the proposed meeting.

The writ petition is wholly misconceived and liable to be dismissed in limine. The Petitioner, being the member of the Gram Panchayat, is not affected by conducting the meeting which is scheduled tomorrow itself. If the members who have moved the ''no confidence motion'' are absent as of now, that does not mean that they will not attend the meeting that is going to be held tomorrow. If they purposely not participate in the meeting, the move for ''no confidence motion'' initiated by them would be failed. In any event, the right of the Petitioner as member of the Gram Panchayat will not be affected. Since the meeting notice at Annexure-B is in accordance with the Rules, the same cannot be quashed at the instance of the Petitioner. The allegations of the Petitioner is that the other members have been taken and detained in an un-known place. If that be so, it is for such members or their family members to lodge complaints and avail the remedy provided in law. They are not before this Court making any such complaint. Petitioner alone has filed this writ petition with a view to stall the meeting which is scheduled to be held tomorrow itself ie. on 27.6.2001. The writ petition is frivolous.

The second prayer to direct the Assistant Commissioner to adjourn the proposed meeting also cannot be granted at the instance of the Petitioner. A detailed procedure is prescribed for the conduct of the meeting and the meeting has to be held in the same manner. The meeting cannot be adjourned at the instance of the Petitioner. Sub-rule (5) of Rule 3 of the Rules clearly prohibits adjournment of meeting and the said sub-rule is extracted hereunder:

Save as otherwise provided in the Act or these rules, a meeting convened for the purpose of considering a motion under Sub-rule (2) shall not for any reason be adjourned.

In view of the above rule, the direction sought in the second prayer to adjourn the proposed meeting cannot be granted.

Writ Petition is misconceived and the same is dismissed.