Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33060 (CAL)

MDMERAJUL HAQUE AND ORS v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/18531/2026 · 2026-08-05

Suvra Ghosh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

05.08.2026 rc/ct.no.15 Item No.52 WPA No. 18531 of 2026 Md. Merajul Haque & Ors. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Gangadhar Das Mr. Tanmoy Chattopadhyay ..for the petitioner Mr. Jasojeet Mukherjee Mrs. Kakali Chanda …for the State Affidavit of service filed by the petitioners is taken on record. The Panchayat and the private respondent are not represented despite service. The petitioners who are members of the Bairgachi-I Gram Panchayat submitted a no confidence motion for removal of the Pradhan of the Panchayat before the Prescribed Authority on June 29, 2026 which was received by the latter on the same date. By a notice issued on July 07, 2026, the date of meeting was fixed on July 21, 2026. The meeting was cancelled due to non-availability of police assistance. The petitioners seek a direction upon the Prescribed Authority to convene the meeting and conclude the proceeding in accordance with law. It appears that upon receipt and verification of the motion, the Prescribed Authority convened the meeting in terms of Section 12(3) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. Since the meeting could not be held due to lack of police assistance, such situation is contemplated under Section 12(4) of the Act of 1973 which permits the Prescribed Authority to adjourn/cancel a meeting for reasons beyond his control. Non-availability of police assistance can be termed as a reason beyond the control of the Prescribed Authority. An Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court has dealt with a similar issue in MAT No. 992 of 2022 and by an order passed on July 15, 2022 has held that if a meeting is adjourned for reasons beyond the control of the Prescribed Authority, the time period of 30 days prescribed in Section 12(10) of the Act of 1973 also stands extended correspondingly. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to hold that the time frame stipulated in Section 12(10) of the Act of 1973 having stood extended correspondingly, the Prescribed Authority and Block Development Officer, Gazole Development Block, being the 7th respondent herein, is directed to convene the meeting within 10 days from the date of communication of this order upon service of notice to all concerned and take the proceeding to its logical conclusion at the earliest, in accordance with law. The Inspector in Charge, Gazole Police Station, being the 8th respondent herein, is directed to render necessary assistance to the 7th respondent so that the meeting is held peacefully and without any disturbance from any corner whatsoever. The writ petition is disposed of. 2 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) 3