29.07.2026 rc/ct.no.15 Item No.31 WPA No. 18417 of 2026 Rezaul Khan Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee Mrs. Suchismita Chakaraborty Mr. Debarnab Adhikary ..for the petitioner Mr. Badal Singh Mr. Akash Adak …for the State Mr. Pankaj Halder Mr. Omar Faruk Mr. Pratikur Rahaman Ms. Bidisha Das …for the respondent nos. 7,8, 10, 11, 12 Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner in Court today is taken on record. The 9th and 11th respondents are not represented despite service. The petitioner who is the Pradhan of Kaligram Gram Panchayat has assailed the no confidence motion and notice dated July 13, 2026 and has prayed for a direction upon the Prescribed Authority to act in strict compliance of Section 12 of the West Bengal Act, 1973. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by an order passed on July 08, 2026, this Court set aside/quashed the requisition notice on the ground that copy of the notice/motion was not delivered to the Pradhan either by hand or by registered post at the Gram Panchayat office or sent to him by registered post at his residential address. Liberty was granted by this Court to the requisitionists to submit a fresh requisition notice before the Prescribed Authority. Despite such order, the Prescribed Authority, by a notice issued on July 09, 2026 postponed the meeting instead of declaring the motion as cancelled. A fresh motion was submitted by the private respondents on July 13, 2026 and by a notice issued on July 20, 2026 the Prescribed Authority fixed the date of meeting on July 30, 2026. Learned counsel submits that the 9th and 11th respondents who are signatories to the motion submitted an application before the Prescribed Authority on July 22, 2026 stating that their signatures were obtained in the motion upon misrepresentation and they intended to refrain from the said motion. According to the learned counsel, the notice of meeting was issued without satisfaction of the Prescribed Authority with regard to the conformity to the requirements of sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act of 1973. Learned counsel for the private respondents except respondent nos. 9 and 11 submits that the entire proceeding has been carried forward by the Prescribed Authority in terms of Section 12 of the Act of 1973. It appears that by an order passed on July 08, 2026 in WPA No. 15777 of 20-26, the no confidence motion was set aside/quashed by this Court. Strangely, by a notice issued on July 09, 2026, the Prescribed Authority 2 postponed the meeting in connection with the motion which was already quashed. The notice was therefore redundant and could not have been acted upon. A fresh motion was submitted by the private respondents on July 13, 2026 and received by the Prescribed Authority on the same date. Notice of meeting was issued by the Prescribed Authority on July 20, 2026 which is sufficient to hold that the Prescribed Authority satisfied himself that the motion conformed to the requirements of sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act of 1973 prior to issuance of the said notice. Recording of such satisfaction is not enjoined in law. Respondent nos. 9 and 11 chose to remain silent with regard to their dissent till the date of meeting was announced by the notice dated July 20, 2026. It was only on July 22, 2026 that they chose to approach the Prescribed Authority objecting to their signatures taken in the no confidence motion. The said respondents have also not approached this Court despite service of notice upon them, to assail their signatures in the no confidence motion. It is the petitioner/ Pradhan who points this out before the Court. Even without the signatures of respondent nos. 9 and 11 being considered, the motion has been submitted by 1/3rd majority of the Panchayat and is valid. The proceeding has been taken forward by the Prescribed Authority in terms of Section 12 of the Act. The meeting is scheduled tomorrow, i.e. on July 30, 2026. The allegations 3 raised by the petitioner in the writ petition are devoid of any merit. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Since the meeting is scheduled tomorrow, the Inspector-in-Charge, Chanchol Police Station is directed to render necessary assistance to the Prescribed Authority so that the meeting is held peacefully and without any disturbance from any corner whatsoever. 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. All parties are directed to act upon the server copy downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Suvra Ghosh,J) 4