15 jdt. 28.07.2026 jb. WPA 18460 of 2026 (Uttam Biswas vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) Usof Ali Dewan Asif Dewan Mehedi Masud …. For the Petitioner Mr. Madhu Jana Mr. Subhajit Das …. For the State Mr. Shibaji Kr. Das Mr. Dipendu Sarkar Ms. Deblina De …. For the Respondent nos. 5 to 17 Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. The Panchayat Samiti is not represented despite service. The petitioner who is the Saha Sabhapati of Tehatta I Panchayat Samiti has assailed the no confidence motion submitted by the private respondents/members of the Samiti and the notice issued by the Prescribed Authority pursuant to the same on several counts. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the motion has not been signed by the members/requisitionists. Only their names appear in the motion. Copy of the motion has not been served/sent to the petitioner in terms of Section 101(2) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. The motion was submitted on 8th July, 2026 and the notice convening the meeting was issued on 20th 2 July, 2026 fixing the date of the meeting on 31st July, 2026. Such notice is in violation of Sections 101(3) and 101(4) of the Act. Learned counsel for the private respondents produces documents which demonstrate that copy of the motion was served upon the petitioner at the office of the Panchayat Samiti and sent to him at his residence in compliance with Section 101(2) of the Act. The motion bears the names of each of the members of the Samiti and it is crystal clear therefrom that the members have put their names/signatures in the said motion. However, though the motion was submitted before the Prescribed Authority on 8th July, 2026, the meeting was convened only on 20th July, 2026 fixing the date on 31st July, 2026 in violation of the time frame stipulated under Sections 101(3) and 101(4) of the Act. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to hold that the proceeding initiated by the Prescribed Authority is de hors the provision laid down under Section 101 of the Act, which renders the motion as well as the notice bad in law. Accordingly, the no confidence motion and the notice issued by the Prescribed Authority on 20th July, 2026 are set aside/quashed. 3 Liberty is granted to the private respondents to submit a fresh no confidence motion before the Prescribed Authority in terms of Section 101 of the Act. On receipt of such motion, the Prescribed Authority is directed to act in terms of the said provision of law, particularly the time frame stipulated therein. The writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit has been invited, allegations contained in the writ petition shall be deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)