CHENNAI: The Madras High Court had pointed out that for removing a village panchayat president, not less than two-thirds of the sanctioned strength of the village panchayat should sign a representation containing charges against the president and it should be submitted to the Inspector of Panchayats.
Referring to Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, Justice N Sathish Kumar held, “A process to remove a panchayat president can be initiated by the inspector of panchayats either on his own motion or on a representation in writing signed by not less than two-thirds of the sanctioned strength of the village panchayat. It must have a statement of charges against the president and be presented in person to the inspector of panchayats by any two of the members of the concerned panchayat.”
The judge made this observation while dismissing a petition filed by B Yuvaraj, a panchayat ward member of Arigilapadi village panchayat in Ranipet. He asked for a direction to the district inspector of panchayats to remove the president and VP of his panchayat.
Yuvaraj accused the president and his deputy of suppressing the availability of funds for the panchayat and not inviting tender for certain works.
Recording the submissions, the court ruled that by a mere allegation by a ward member, the proceedings under Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 cannot be initiated.
Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!
Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!
Click here for iOS
Click here for Android