#Sarpanch Removal

Bombay HC clarifies that repeated administrative lapses, particularly systematic violations of tender rules, constitute misconduct under the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, justifying removal of an elected Sarpanch. The ruling sets a precedent for holding local self-government officials accountable for statutory breaches beyond mere procedural errors.

Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that a no-confidence motion against a Sarpanch is invalid if the seven-day clear notice requirement under Rule 3(3) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Rules, 1994, is not strictly complied with. The judgment reinforces procedural fairness in local governance, ensuring elected representatives cannot be removed without proper notice to all members.

The Chhattisgarh High Court quashed a no-confidence motion against a Sarpanch for failing to provide seven clear days' notice between dispatch and meeting dates, as required under Rule 3(3). This reinforces that procedural compliance in local governance is not discretionary - even minor timing lapses invalidate removal proceedings, protecting elected representatives from arbitrary ouster.