23.09.2026 rc/ct.no.15 Item No.26 WPA No. 27121 of 2026 Renu Bibi & Ors. Versus The State of West Bengal & Ors. Adv. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee Adv. Manas Das Adv. Suchismita Chakraborty ..for the petitioners Adv. Arka Bhattacharya Adv. Sudipa Maiti …for the State Affidavit of service filed by the petitioners and report filed by the State are taken on record. The petitioners who are members of Jatradanga Gram Panchayat has assailed the notice issued by the Prescribed Authority in respect of the hearing pertaining to an application filed by the leader of opposition under Section 11(1)(d) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the meeting was initially fixed on September 18, 2026 and subsequently postponed to September 24, 2026. On the same date, the meeting for election of Upa Pradhan has been fixed by the Prescribed Authority. It will not be possible for the petitioners to attend both the meetings which are fixed on the same date. Also, the notice has been issued in violation of Section 11(1) of the Act of 1973 and is required to be quashed. Learned counsel for the State submits that in postponing the meeting initially fixed on September 18, 2026, the Prescribed Authority was not aware of the date of meeting fixed for election of the Upa Pradhan. However, learned counsel candidly submits that no show cause under Section 11(1) of the Act of 1973 has been issued upon the petitioners prior to issuance of the notice of meeting. Section 11(1) of the Act envisages that the Prescribed Authority may, after giving an opportunity to a member of a Gram Panchayat to show cause against the action proposed to be taken against him, by order remove him from office on the ground stated in the said provision of law. Admittedly no such show cause has been issued by the Prescribed Authority upon the petitioners. The Prescribed Authority has merely served a notice of meeting upon the petitioners which does not disclose the details of the allegation raised against them. The Prescribed Authority has failed to comply with the provision under Section 11(1) of the Act prior to issuance of the notice. In view of the above, the notice of meeting issued in respect of hearing under Section 11(1)(d) of the Act of 1973 and the meeting fixed for the purpose on September 24, 2026 are quashed/set aside. The Prescribed Authority is directed to comply with Section 11(1) of the Act of 1973 and take the proceeding to its logical conclusion in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. 2 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