August 28, 2026 (32) ARDR WPA 23155 of 2026 Dipali Singh Vs. The State of West Bengal & ors. Adv. Supratick Syamal, Adv. Arkarupa Roy, …for the petitioner. Adv. Anup Dasgupta, Adv. P. Sukla, …for the State. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. The petitioner who is the Pradhan of Changual Gram Panchayat has assailed the no confidence motion submitted by the private respondents/members of the Panchayat on 12st August, 2026 for her removal on the ground that the motion contains stigma. On perusal of the motion, it appears that it raises several allegations against the petitioner/Pradhan including dereliction of duty, lack of transparency, reluctance to undertake developmental work, etc. Such allegations are undoubtedly stigmatic. It is settled law that a motion containing stigma against the office bearer cannot be sustained in the eye of law, more so, since there is no opportunity for the Pradhan/petitioner to rebut/deny such allegations. Allowing the stigmatic motion to continue may affect the future political pursuits of the petitioner, if any. In view of the above, the motion is quashed/set aside. All consequential steps taken by the Prescribed 2 Authority pursuant to the motion are also set aside/ quashed. However, liberty is granted to the private respondents/members to submit a fresh motion before the Prescribed Authority in terms of Section 12 of The West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. In the event such motion is submitted, the Prescribed Authority shall deal with the same in terms of the said provision of law, 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 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.)