CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has quashed the no-confidence proceedings initiated against the sarpanch of Kandarai gram panchayat in Cuttack district, holding that the statutory requirement under the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 cannot be fulfilled by merely serving a notice for convening the meeting.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Chittaranjan Dash set aside the January 8, 2026, notice issued by the Athagarh sub-collector and all consequential proceedings against sarpanch Gyana Ranjan Dash after finding non-compliance with Section 24(2)(c) of the Act.
Initially, Dash had challenged the no-confidence process after the Athagarh sub-collector issued the notice. A single judge had permitted the scheduled no-confidence meeting to be held but restrained publication of its result. The petition, however, was dismissed on July 14, prompting the writ appeal by Dash. Advocate Sukant Kumar Dalai argued on Dash’s behalf.
Considering the writ appeal against the July 14 order of the single judge, the bench ruled that the law mandates service of not only the notice convening the special meeting but also copies of the requisition and the proposed no-confidence resolution.
“A plain reading of Section 24(2)(c) of the Odisha Grama Panchayats Act, 1964 makes it abundantly clear that the statutory requirement is not satisfied by mere service of a notice convening the special meeting. The notice must necessarily be accompanied by copies of the requisition and the proposed resolution,” the bench observed. The web copy of the order was released on August 4.
The judges said the legislative intent behind the provision was to ensure that an elected office-bearer is informed not only about the meeting but also about the basis and subject matter of the proposed motion. “To hold otherwise would render a substantial part of Section 24(2)(c) redundant,” the court said.
The bench found that the authorities had failed to establish compliance with the mandatory statutory requirement. While quashing the proceedings, the bench clarified that the prescribed authority is free to initiate a fresh no-confidence process, provided it strictly complies with Section 24(2)(c) by serving the notice along with copies of the requisition and the proposed resolution before proceeding further.
