Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)
Hakim Singh, Sarpanch vs State Of Punjab And Others on 28 March, 1994 cites

Sham Lal Thakar Dass Aggarwal vs Punjab National Bank Ltd. And Ors. on 12 April, 1960

4. Section 14 of the Act provides quoram for meeting of the Gram Panchayat, as majority of the panches for the time being holding office. There are six members of the Panchayat and the seventh is Sarpanch. Out of even, four would constitute the quoram. For smooth functioning of the panchayat, a democratic rule is provided that the decision of the majority of the members of panchayat would be final. If some members are not attending the meeting called by the Sarpanch, some action against them under the Act, or Rules framed thereunder, may be taken. But that per se cannot be a ground that the Sarpanch is not acting in accordance with law that action could be taken under Section 99(1) of the Act for non-observance or compliance of the resolutions passed by the Panchayat. It is the responsibility of the Sarpanch, as already held by this Court in Thakar Singh v. State of Punjab, 1983 Punj LJ 481 and Bakhshish Singh v. Divisional Dy. Director, Panchayat, 1985 Pun LJ 99. There is no dispute with the proposition, as stated above. However, this is not a case where any action against the Sarpanch, as such, is being taken, suffice it to say, in exercise of the powers under Section 99(1) of the Act, in the facts of the present case, order Annexure P/1 could not be passed. The same is, therefore, quashed.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 7 - Full Document
1