09 1188..0088..22002266 Ct. No.15 b.das WPA 20794 of 2026 Kabatul Shaikh & Ors. Vs. The State of W. B. & Ors. Mr. Robiul Islam Mr. Shamim Ul Bari Sk. Jayed Hossain Mr. Masooq Rahman …for the petitioners. Mr. Asis Mukherjee Mr. Ankur Sharma …for the State. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioners is taken on record. The private respondents are not represented despite service. The 1st petitioner is the Upa Pradhan of Kashiadanga Gram Panchayat and the 2nd and 3rd petitioners are members of the Panchayat who put their signatures in the no confidence motion submitted for removal of the Upa Pradhan alongwith other members. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Gram Panchayat comprises 24 members, out of whom one has expired. Out of the 23 members, 9 members submitted the no confidence motion before the Prescribed Authority. The 2nd and 3rd petitioners who also put their signatures in the motion submitted letters before the Prescribed Authority on 6th August, 2026 recusing 2 themselves from the motion and supporting the Upa Pradhan. Learned counsel submits that in view of the same, the motion is not in compliance with Section 12(2) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 and cannot be sustained. Learned counsel for the State submits that the notice of meeting was issued by the Prescribed Authority on 6th August, 2026 prior to submission of the letters by the 2nd and 3rd petitioners. Section 12(2) of the Act of 1973 enumerates that for the purpose of removal of the Pradhan or the Upa Pradhan one-third of the existing members referred to in sub-section 1 subject to a minimum of 3 members shall sign a motion in writing expressing their lack of confidence. In the present case, since two of the requisitionists have opted out of the motion and intend to support the Upa Pradhan, the number of requisitionists who have submitted the motion falls to 7 which is below one-third majority of the members. Therefore it can be said that the motion is not in conformity with Section 12(2) of the Act and cannot sustain. In view of the above, the motion submitted before the Prescribed Authority, the notice of meeting issued pursuant thereto by the authority and the meeting fixed 3 this day, that is, on 18th August, 2026 are quashed/set aside. However, the private respondents are at liberty to submit a fresh motion in terms of Section 12 of the Act before the Prescribed Authority. In the event such motion is submitted, the Prescribed Authority shall take necessary steps in accordance with Section 12 of the Act, particularly the time frame stipulated therein. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. 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.)