17 jdt. 24.08.2026 jb. WPA 22530 of 2026 (Rehena Parvin @ Rahena Parvin vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee Mr. Manas Das Mrs. Suchismita Chakraborty …. For the Petitioner Mr. Suman Chattopadhyay …. For the State Sarwar Jahan Mr. Anindya Ghosh Mr. Souvik Das …. For the Respondent nos. 6-14 and 16-22 On prayer of the petitioner liberty is granted to correct the cause title of the application. Report submitted by the petitioner is taken on record. The petitioner who is the Pradhan of Kharba Gram Panchayat has assailed the no confidence motion submitted by the private respondents/members of the Panchayat on the ground that one copy of the motion bears the date 29th July, 2026 and the copy sent to her is dated 28th July, 2026. Also, the party affiliation of one of the requisitionists Parvin Khatun has been written and subsequently struck off. The Prescribed Authority has not applied his mind in verifying the same prior to issuance of the notice of the meeting. Learned counsel for the private respondents submits that no confidence motion for removal of the Pradhan was submitted on 28th July 2026 and another motion for removal of the Upa Pradhan was submitted on 29th July, 2026. It is not clear how the petitioner 2 obtained a copy of the motion dated 29th July, 2026 submitted before the Prescribed Authority. The said copy dated 29th July, 2026 also finds place in the report submitted by the State alongwith the endorsement ‘14’ from which it is clear that this copy is a photocopy taken from the copy of the writ petition furnished to the State and not a copy obtained from the official records of the Prescribed Authority. I have considered the rival contention of the parties. Out of 26 members of the Panchayat 16 members put their signatures in the no confidence motion. It is a fact that the party affiliation of the 11th signatory Parvin Khatun has been struck off. Even if the said member is not considered, the motion is still submitted by 1/3rd members of the Panchayat and is in accordance with Section 12(2) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. Learned counsel for the private respondents produces copies of the motion submitted before the Prescribed Authority which demonstrate that the motion for removal of the Pradhan was submitted on 28th July, 2026 and one for removal of the Upa Pradhan was submitted on 29th July, 2026. It is not known how the petitioner obtained the copy of the motion dated 29th July, 2026, a copy of which has also been relied upon by the Prescribed Authority by obtaining a photocopy from the writ petition. 3 Copy of the motion was sent to the petitioner at her residential address on 30th July, 2026. The notice of meeting was issued by the Prescribed Authority on 3rd August, 2026. The report indicates that such notice was issued after the Prescribed Authority was satisfied with regard to the motion being in conformity with Section 12(2) of the Act. Therefore it can be held that the motionsubmitted and procedure adopted by the Prescribed Authority pursuant thereto are in terms of Section 12 of the Act. There is no illegality/irregularity therein which requires interference by this Court. The earlier meeting fixed by the Prescribed Authority on 17th August, 2026 was postponed due to non availability of police assistance. By the notice dated 16th August, 2026 postponing the meeting, the Prescribed Authority has recorded that the meeting was postponed due to reasons beyond his control, in terms of Section 12(4) of the Act. Further date of meeting has been fixed on 25th August, 2026. In view of the above, the Prescribed Authority is directed to hold the meeting on the scheduled date and take the proceeding to its logical conclusion in terms of the relevant provisions of law. The Officer in Charge, Chanchal Police Station is directed to render necessary assistance to the Prescribed Authority so that the meeting is held 4 peacefully without any disturbance from any corner whatsoever. 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. Parties are at liberty to communicate the gist of the order to the concerned authority at the earliest. Urgent certified website copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties on compliance of requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)