Assam Panchayat Act, 1994– s.15(1)– Mandatory provision– Waiver of – No Confidence Motion passed against respondent no. 6, President of the concerned Panchayat in a meeting presided over by the Block Development Officer (BDO) – Respondent no. 6 lost her Presidentship and the appellant, Vice President, was directed to function as incharge President of the concerned Panchayat for the time being– Writ petition filed by respondent no.6 challenging the legal acceptability and validity of the resolution expressing want of confidence against her, allowed– Held: On a plain reading of the s.15(1), it is clear that the meeting has to be convened by the Deputy Commissioner within a stipulated time and the said authority has also been conferred the power to depute one Gazetted Officer under him not below the rank of Class I Gazetted Officer to preside over the meeting – A mandatory provision of law requires strict compliance but there are situations where even if a provision is mandatory, non-compliance would not result in nullification of the act – One such exception is, if a certain requirement or condition is provided in a statute for the benefit or interest of a particular person, the same can be waived by him if no public interest is involved – In the present case, respondent no. 6 who was a beneficiary attended the meeting wherein voting had taken place and no public interest was affected – Further, the BDO presided over the meeting and everyone including respondent no.6 knew that the meeting was called for passing a resolution either in favour of or against the No Confidence Motion – After losing in the voting process, the procedure of calling the meeting was assailed – Having participated, respondent no. 6 waived the condition precedent – Resolution passed against respondent no. 6 valid – Waiver. Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 On a plain reading of the Section 15(1), Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 it is crystal clear that the meeting has to be convened by the Deputy Commissioner within a stipulated time and the said authority has also been conferred the power to depute one Gazetted Officer under him not below the rank of Class I Gazetted Officer to preside over the meeting. The said situation comes into existence after the Deputy Commissioner is informed to convene the meeting. [Para 9] [240-G]
1.2 The resolution passed in the meeting on 31.03.2014 records that the respondent no. 6 was present in the meeting and signed. The meeting was held to discuss the Motion of NoConfidence. The respondent no. 6 who was a beneficiary attended the meeting and voting had taken place. It is well settled in law that a mandatory provision of law requires strict compliance but there are situations where even if a provision is mandatory, noncompliance would not result in nullification of the act. There are certain exceptions. One such exception is, if a certain requirement or condition is provided in a statute for the benefit or interest of a particular person, the same can be waived by him if no public interest is involved. The ultimate result would be valid even if the requirement or condition is not performed. In the obtaining fact situation, no public interest was affected. The Block Development Officer (BDO) presided over the meeting and every one knew that the meeting was called for passing a resolution either in favour of or against the No Confidence Motion. The respondent no. 6 knowing fully well participated in the meeting and the resolution was passed against her. After losing in the voting process, the assail was made to the procedure of calling the meeting. Had the respondent no.6 not participated in the meeting, the matter would have been absolutely different. Having participated, it has to be held that the respondent no. 6 had waived the condition precedent. The orders passed by the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench are set aside. The resolution passed against the respondent no. 6 is treated as valid. [Paras 11, 13 and 14] [241-F-G; 242-D-H; 243-A]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.