21.08.2026 rc/ct.no.15 Item No.07 WPA No. 18682 of 2026 Farida Khatun Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Adv. S.P.Lahiri Adv. Md. Habibur Rahman ..for the petitioner Adv. Anirban Das Adv. Renesa Dey …for the State Adv. Mrityunjoy Chakraborty Adv. Manas Das Adv. M. Naser Chowdhury Adv. Farheen Rais Adv. Yusuf Hassan …for the respondent nos.15-24, 26, 27 & 28 Adv. Arghya Mullick ..for the respondent no.8 Report submitted by the State is taken on record. It appears from the report that the notice of meeting was served upon the Pradhan at the Panchayat office by hand on the date of issuance of notice, that is, on July 15, 2026. The petitioner has admitted that copy of the notice was sent to her at her residential address on July 15, 2026. The petitioner contends that the copy of notice was served upon her at the Panchayat office by registered post on July 24, 2026. Be that as it may, since one copy of the notice was served upon her by hand at the office on July 15, 2026, the notice can be said to be in conformity with Section 12(2) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. Learned counsel for the petitioner produces a copy of letter issued by the Secretary of the Panchayat on July 31, 2026 stating that no letter regarding no confidence motion against the Pradhan was received at the Gram Panchayat level. Since it is not in dispute that the no confidence motion was submitted before the Prescribed Authority on July 15, 2026 and the notice pursuant thereto was issued by the authority on July 23, 2026, much reliance cannot be placed on the letter issued by the Secretary. By an order passed on August 06, 2026, this Court stayed the meeting fixed by the Prescribed Authority on July 23, 2026. In view of the observation made hereinabove, it can be concluded that the motion has been submitted in terms of Section 12 of the Act of 1973 and the procedure undertaken by the Prescribed Authority is in conformity with the said Act. Since the meeting has been stayed by an order of this Court, such situation falls under Section 12(4) of the Act of 1973 which says that a meeting shall not be adjourned or cancelled except in pursuance of an order or direction of a competent Court. Such situation is definitely a situation beyond the control of the Prescribed Authority. In view of the observation of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on the said issue in MAT No. 992 of 2022 dated July 15, 2022, the time period of 30 days prescribed in Section 12(10) of the Act stands extended correspondingly. The Prescribed Authority and Block Development Officer, Islampur Block, being the 4th respondent herein, is directed to convene the meeting within 10 days from the 2 date of communication of this order and take the proceeding to its logical conclusion at the earliest, in accordance with law. The Officer in Charge, Islampur 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. The parties are at liberty to communicate the gist of the order to the concerned authorities at the earliest. The writ petition is 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) 3