Gujarat High Court
Manguben Kalubhai Thakor & 4 vs District Development Officer & 4 on 18 January, 2016
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Mohinder Pal
C/SCA/837/2016 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 837 of 2016
==========================================================
MANGUBEN KALUBHAI THAKOR & 4....Petitioner(s)
Versus
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & 4....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS NIYATI K SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 5
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 , 3 - 5
MR HS MUNSHAW, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL
Date : 18/01/2016
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1. The petitioners belonged to a particular political party and are elected as members of Santalpur Taluka Panchayat. They objected to convening of the meeting of Taluka Panchayat dated 18.01.2016, during which, the business of constituting executive and social justice committees is to be transacted. According to the petitioners, the notice for holding such meeting was not issued as per Rule 4 of the Gujarat Panchayats (Procedure) Rules, 1997 which requires that, the Secretary of the Pancyat shall, atleast 15 clear days before the date fixing for Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Wed Jan 20 00:50:43 IST 2016 C/SCA/837/2016 ORDER any ordinary meeting cause to be sent to all members intimation of the date, time and place of such meeting and object of the business to be transacted at such meeting with itemwise agenda notes. Case of the petitioners is that, though the notice was prepared on 02.01.2016, the same was sent to some of the members only on 05.01.2016, thus, clearly violating the requirements of Rule 4 of the Gujarat Panchayats (Procedure) Rules. The case of the petitioners further is that many of the members were served with notices long thereafter and, in case of petitioner No.1, she has not been served with such notice at all. However, she has come to know about the same through other members.
2. Looking to the urgency involved, on 15.01.2016, this Court issued short notice making returnable today. Learned advocate Mr. Munshaw appeared for the Panchayat and submitted that the requirements of Rule 4 are of procedural nature and as long as there is a substantial compliance thereof, the convening of the meeting cannot be disturbed. He relied on the decision of learned Single Judge in case of Gopaldas Bakubhai Rana vs. Lunavada Nagar Panchayat and ors. reported in 1985 (2) GLR 1047.
3. In view of the fact that the decision cited by Mr. Munshaw is of a Single Judge, we would like to examine this issue further. However, due to paucity of time, it has not been possible to elicit full response from all respondents. In the meantime, since Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Wed Jan 20 00:50:43 IST 2016 C/SCA/837/2016 ORDER admittedly, all members of the panchayat have been duly intimated about the proposed meeting, we do not propose to stay the proceedings. However, any decision taken during such meeting shall be subject to outcome of this petition.
4. S.O. to 02.02.2016 to enable the respondents to file reply.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) Jyoti Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Wed Jan 20 00:50:43 IST 2016