Saturday, July 13, 2024
Top Stories

HC upholds removal of Liphanyan Village Council Chairman

Gauhati High Corut Kohima Bench

DIMAPUR, DECEMBER 17: Concluding that due process was followed, the Kohima Bench of Gauhati High Court has refused to interfere with the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (DC) of Wokha removing the Chairman of Liphanyan Village Council from office. According to Court records, the petition was filed by N Ekonthung Ovung, challenging the order issued by DC Wokha on November 3, whereby the petitioner was removed from the chairmanship of Liphanyan Village Council under Section 9(3)(c) of the Nagaland Village & Tribal Councils Act, 1978.
“From a perusal of the writ petition, it is apparent that there were seventeen (17) members when the no-confidence motion was held in the presence of the SDO(C), Ralan, pertaining to the No-Confidence Motion Meeting called by the Deputy Commissioner”, stated an order issued by Justice Devashis Baruah on December 15.
The Judge noted that Section 9(3)(c) of the Nagaland Village Council Act, 1978 as inserted vide its 4th Amendment Act of 2009 permits the State Government to remove any Chairman of Village Councils from office when a ‘no-confidence motion’ is moved and passed “by the majority of the Village council members present and voting, in a special session for the purpose that may be summoned by the Deputy Commissioner, and to presided by an administrative officer not below the rank of EAC, duly authorised in this behalf by the Deputy Commissioner of the District concerned.”
Accordingly, he ruled: “From a perusal of the above quoted clause, it would be seen that when a no-confidence motion is moved and passed by the majority of the Village Council present and voting in a Special Session for the purpose that may be summoned by the Deputy Commissioner and be presided by an Administrative Officer not below the rank of EAC, duly authorised on their behalf by the Deputy Commissioner, the State Government may remove any Chairman of the Village Council.
“As admittedly there were seventeen (17) members who were present and eleven (11) voted in favour of the no confidence against the petitioner, this Court sees no reasons for interference with the Order dated November 3, 2003. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition for which the same is dismissed”.
(Page News Service)

error: