Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28687 (CAL)

RESMA KHATUN v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/13349/2026 · 2026-07-16

Suvra Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

31 1166..0077..22002266 Ct. No.15 b.das WPA 13349 of 2026 Mr. Malay Bhattacharyya Mr. Pradip Paul Ms. Renesa Dey …for the petitioner. Mr. Manojit Bhattacharya Mr. Masud Mullick…for the respondent no.5. Mr. Madhu Jana Ms. Puja Sonkar …for the State. The only allegation of the petitioner herein is that copy of the motion was not sent to her residential address in terms of Section 12(2) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. It is submitted on behalf of the 5th respondent who is one of the members of the Panchayat/requisitionists that copy of the motion was not sent to the Pradhan at her residential address. It is not in dispute that the motion was served upon the Pradhan/petitioner at the Panchayat office. In view of the fact that the motion was not sent to the petitioner at her residential address, the same is in violation of Section 12(2) of the Act and is therefore illegal/invalid and cannot be acted upon. The writ petition is allowed. The no confidence motion submitted on 22nd May, 2026 is quashed/set aside. 2 However, requisitions/private respondents shall be at liberty to submit a fresh motion before the Prescribed Authority in terms of Section 12 (2) of the Act. The Prescribed Authority shall deal with the same in accordance with the relevant provision of law. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)