Patna High Court Warns BDOs 'Complicit' With Local Leaders; Orders Sensitisation About Panchayat Raj Act, Directions Of Election Commission

The Patna High Court today directed the Bihar Government to convene a state-level meeting of all the Block Development Officers (BDOs) cum Executive Officers of Panchayat Samitis to sensitize and aware them about the working of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006, the directions issued by the State Election Commission and the judgments passed by the High Court regarding the Act.

The Court expressed dismay over the unauthorized act of the BDOs to refuse convening of the 'no-confidence motion' meeting against the 'Pramukh' and 'Up-Pramukh' despite 1/3 of the panchayat members agreeing to hold such a meeting. A warning was issued to the BDOs to act in accordance with the guidelines otherwise appropriate action shall be taken against them in accordance with the law.

“Time has now come for 'the Department' to convene a State level meeting of all the Block Development Officers cum the Executive Officers of Panchayat Samitis in the State capital to be addressed by the Senior Officials of 'the Department' as also the officials of the State Election Commission beside the learned Advocate General, Bihar and/or any Senior Government Counsel/Senior Counsel nominated by the learned A.G. They should be given guidelines of do's/don'ts, sensitized about 'the Act', the letters/memos/circulars of 'the Department' issued from time to time as also the State Election Commission along with the various judgments of Patna High Court related to 'the Act'. They be further directed to act strictly in line making it clear that failure to do so, appropriate action shall be taken against them in accordance with the law.”, the court said.

“Let a copy of the order be sent to the respondent no.1, the Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Bihar, Patna for his perusal and needful.” the Court ordered.

The bench comprising Justice Rajiv Roy reasoned that since the BDOs are not only unaware of 'the Act as also the guidelines of the Department and judgments rendered, at times, and are acting independently and in connivance of those in power at the local level', therefore it would in the interest of the State to hold such a meeting soon for the better health of the Panchayat Samitis across the State.

It was a case where the BDO refused to convene the meeting for no-confidence against the Pramukhs and Up-Pramukhs despite the approval of 1/3rd of the Panchayat Members. BDO reasoned once no-confidence proceedings were dropped due to inadequacy of the required Coram therefore no new motion could be adopted against the Pramukhs and Up-Pramukhs.

Deprecating such practice, the Court clarified that it would be impermissible for the BDO to refuse convening of the meeting called on by the 1/3rd of panchayat samiti's members for a no-confidence motion against the Pramukhs and Up-Pramukhs. Also, the Court said that when the meeting was called on but no motion was passed due to the absence of members than there is no bar in calling for a fresh special meeting to discuss the 'No Confidence Motion' against the 'Pramukh' and Up-Pramukh.

The Court relied on its judgment passed in Dharamsheela Kumari vs. Hement Kumar and others reported in 2021 (3) PLJR 346 where it was cleared that any motion which has not been put to vote, the legal bar of moving a fresh motion of no confidence stipulated under section 44(3) (ii) of 'the Act' would not be attracted.

Case Title: Yasmin Aash & Anr. versus The State of Bihar & Ors., Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12087 of 2024 (and connected matters)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Pat) 72

Click here to read/download the judgment