38 2233..0099..22002266 Ct. No.15 b.das WPA 25758 of 2026 Alomani Mahato Vs. The State of W.B. & Ors. Mr. Balai Lal Sahoo Md. Abdul Alim …for the petitioner. Mr. Avishek Prasad Ms. Riya Ballav Mr. Aindrik Chatterjee…for the private respondents. Ms. Atreyee De Mr. Surajit Singh …for the State. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner and report submitted by the State are taken on record. The petitioner who is the Pradhan of Daldali Gram Panchayat has assailed the notice of meeting issued by the Prescribed Authority pursuant to a no confidence motion submitted by the private respondents/members of the Panchayat. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted an application under Section 11(1)(d) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973 against some of the members of the Panchayat seeking their removal on the ground of their absence in three consecutive meetings of the Panchayat. The said application is yet to be considered. 2 During pendency of the application, the no confidence motion seeking removal of the Pradhan has been submitted and a date of meeting fixed. The petitioner seeks a direction upon the Prescribed Authority to postpone the meeting till the application under Section 11(1)(d) of the Act is disposed of. Upon consideration of the submission made on behalf of the parties, this Court is of the view that the application Section 12 of the Act has no nexus whatsoever with the application under Section 11(1)(d) of the Act. It should also be borne in mind that Section 12 of the Act stipulates a particular time frame for disposal of an application whereas no such time frame is prescribed in Section 11 of the Act. The same issue has been dealt with by an Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the authority in Ujjal Mondal vs. State of West Bengal reported in (2013) 1 CHN 458 wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench has held that it is a basic principle of law that punishment in the nature of disqualification cannot be imposed by debarring somebody to exercise his power as a member or to exercise his rights and responsibilities as a member, so long no order of disqualification is passed. If the members against whom complaints are pending are debarred to bring requisition notice, the consequential effect would be that disqualification clause is being imposed upon them 3 prior to adjudication of complaints seeking disqualification, which under the law is not permissible. In view of the said law laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench, this Court is inclined to hold that the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Since the meeting is scheduled to be held on 24th September, 2026, the Officer in Charge, Hura Police Station is directed to render necessary assistance to the Prescribed Authority so that the meeting is held peacefully and without any hindrance from any corner whatsoever. The police authority shall ensure safe passage of the members of the Panchayat to the venue of the meeting in order to enable them to cast their votes freely and independently. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. 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. The parties are to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)