'Voice Of The Majority Should Be Honoured': Calcutta High Court Refuses To Interfere With No Confidence Motion Against Malda Zilla Parishad President

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday dismissed the plea of Gour Chandra Mandal, President of the Malda Zilla Parishad to withhold a meeting scheduled for July 8 to discuss a no-confidence motion against him. The notice of no confidence was served to Mandal by 23 members of the 38 strong district council.

Justice Shampa Sarkar while dismissing the plea observed,

"..an institution (read as "Zilla Parishad") must run on democratic principles and all persons heading such public bodies could continue to hold office provided they enjoyed the confidence of the persons who comprise such bodies. This is the essence of the democratic republicanism"

Mandal had joined the Malda Zilla Parishad as a TMC (All India Trinamool Congress) candidate in 2018. However, ahead of the 2021 Assembly polls, he had defected to the BJP and consequently contested from the Manichak constituency. He was defeated by TMC's candidate Sabitri Mitra.

In the plea, Mandal had alleged that the signatures in the notice were fabricated and further the prescribed authority while issuing the notice had not complied with procedural regulations as mentioned in Section 146(3) of the West Bengal Panchayat Act, 1973.

Observations:

The Court refused to investigate the genuineness of the signatures in the notice of motion of no confidence by observing that there exists no proof that the signatures are fictitious as alleged by the petitioner. It was also noted that the number of signatories is more than one-third of the existing members of the Zilla Parishad.

"Party affiliations of at least 20 of such candidates have also been indicated. Their booth numbers have been given. The designations have been provided. Thus, I do not find any reason not to accept that these are genuine signatures. Moreover, it is only a doubt expressed but no specific instances have been given by the petitioner as to who were the alleged fictitious persons. They have not been identified", the Court opined.

Further, the Court observed that the competent authority had acted within the mandate of Sections 146(3) and (4) of the Act while issuing the impugned notice dated June 21, 2021. Emphasising the need to uphold democratic ethos, the Court opined that the petitioner must accept the decision of the majority.

"Since the Sabhadhipati is an elected post, he has to accept any decision that may be taken in a democratic process. In a democracy, the voice of the majority should be honoured. Otherwise, the entire function of the democracy would collapse. In this case, as majority of the members have requisitioned a meeting for removal of the petitioner on the ground of lack of confidence on the Sabhadhipati. I am not inclined to set aside the notice and the process initiated, as the petitioner has failed to show statutory non-compliances and any other illegality", the Court concluded.

Case Title: Gour Chandra Mandal Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download Order