Calcutta High Court
Administrative and Public LawConstitutional Law

Prescribed authority must convene the Upa-Pradhan removal meeting within ten days with police protection.

SELIM AKTER AND ORS vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Calcutta High CourtJUDGMENT: September 29, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Prescribed authority must convene the Upa-Pradhan removal meeting within ten days with police protection.. SELIM AKTER AND ORS vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.. Calcutta High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioners, elected members of 11 No. Madhurkul Gram Panchayat, stated that they had lost confidence in the Upa-Pradhan.

Source reference: p. 2

They submitted a requisition dated 24 August 2026, received by the prescribed authority on 27 August 2026, seeking a meeting to consider the Upa-Pradhan’s removal.

Source reference: p. 2

A meeting fixed for 8 September 2026 was postponed because the police could not provide the necessary force.

Source reference: p. 2

The petitioners sought a direction requiring the prescribed authority and the Block Development Officer to convene the meeting with police protection.

Source reference: p. 2

The State submitted that protection could be arranged if the Court granted additional time; the private respondent did not appear despite service.

Source reference: p. 2
02

Issues

1. Whether the prescribed authority’s postponement of the meeting because of the unavailability of police protection warranted a direction to convene the meeting within an extended period.

Source reference: pp. 2–3

2. Whether the meeting should be held with police protection to ensure the safety and security of participants.

Source reference: p. 3
03

Law Applied

The Court relied on the Division Bench decision in MAT 992 of 2022, dated 15 July 2022, which directed that a meeting concerning removal of an Upa-Pradhan be held within an extended period with necessary police protection after an earlier adjournment.

Source reference: p. 3

The judgment refers to statutory provisions governing the requisition but does not identify them by name or section.

Source reference: p. 2

The applicable principle was that security concerns could be addressed by arranging police protection and should not prevent the meeting from being held within a reasonable, extended timeframe.

Source reference: p. 3
04

Reasoning

The meeting had been postponed because the police could not provide protection, but the State indicated that the necessary arrangements could be made if further time were allowed.

Source reference: p. 2

Applying the approach taken in MAT 992 of 2022 to the similar circumstance of an adjourned meeting, the Court concluded that the prescribed authority should convene the meeting within an extended period and that the police should facilitate its safe conduct.

Source reference: p. 3
05

Holding

The Court disposed of the writ petition and directed respondent No. 3 to convene the meeting for removal of the Upa-Pradhan within ten days, with necessary police protection.

It further directed the local police to provide necessary assistance and the Superintendent of Police, Murshidabad, to take steps to ensure participants’ safety and security on the date fixed for the meeting.

Source reference: p. 3
Calcutta High Court

Original Court PDF

SELIM AKTER AND ORSvsSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

Calcutta High Court · September 29, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment