Panchayat:Repo18/Law Manual Page0242
if the council decides to modify, recall, or cancel the resolution it is required to follow the procedure prescribed under R.13 of the Rules. The said rule is a safeguard against any whimsical or cavalier approach, given the pulls and pressures a civic administration faces. The upshot of the above proposition is that, once the resolution itself is vitiated, having been mired in procedural controversy as to the very manner of its passing, and its sanctity has been robbed by the controversy, there cannot be any presumption to any validly passed resolution. Thus, the question of taking recourse to R.13 of the Rules by the councillors, does not arise. The finding of the learned Tribunal is that the Government lacks the power to cancel the resolution passed by the Municipality. In the light of the above discussion, once the hurdle posed through S.57(3) of the Act is removed, under sub-section (1) thereof, there can be no further impediment for the Government to interdict the said 'resolution'. Hence the finding of the learned Tribunal cannot be sustained on that count either. - Binu M. S. v. State of Kerala and Others - 2015 (2) KHC 309 : 2015 (2) KLT 204 : 2015 (2) KLJ 514. [The case law pertains to S.57 & S. 509 of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994. The identical provision applicable to the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 is S.191 & S.276).
Resolutions passed by Panchayat -- Giving effect to -- Scope of proviso -- Held, what is stated in proviso is with regard to reporting to Government by Secretary on issues of policy affecting welfare of people of Grama Panchayat, rather than any issue affecting a single individual. If it is shown that the said decision of Grama Panchayat is ultra vires, then writ petition would be maintainable even if there is an alternative remedy. It cannot be said that in order to assume jurisdiction over activities enumerated in IlIrd Schedule, there has to be a notification under S.235C of the Act. - Onset Developers (M/s.), Palakkad V. Secretary, Akathethara Grama Panchayat, Palakkad and Another - 2015 (1) KHC 497 : 2015 (1) KLT 668.: 2015 (1) KLJ 798.
In Vanaraj v. Santhanpara Grama Panchayath, Idukki and Others, the Panchayat Committee decided to let shopping rooms to a Cooperative Bank by virtue of its resolution. The question that arose for consideration was whether it was proper on the part of Panchayat to do so. The Court held that if property is transferred by way of lease for first time it has to be either by public auction or by inviting tenders. Hence, resolution passed by the Panchayat Committee leasing out shop rooms to Cooperative Bank, is not proper. The view of the Single Judge in 2014 (1) KHC 766, was held not good at law. Member of Panchayat can challenge decision of Panchayat Committee or seek modification or cancellation of decision. Even a Member taking part in decision making process can challenge the said decision when it is open to a third party to challenge it. - Vanaraj v. Santhanpara Grama Panchayath, Idukki and Others - 2014 (2) KHC 674 : 2014 (2) KLT 958 : 2014 (3) KLJ 81.
In a question whether a member of the Panchayat is entitled to challenge a decision taken by the Panchayat it was held that remedy available to a member of Panchayat Committee to maintain a challenge against a resolution passed by Panchayat is by a reference to the Government. – Vanaraj v. Santhanpara Grama Panchayath, Idukki and Others - 2014 (1) KHC 766: ILR 2014 (1) Ker. 1067: 2014 (1) KLT 1065.
The decision that emanates out of the election is the expression of the decision of the body consisting of the members of the Panchayat. Such a decision of the body of the members of the Panchayat is essentially a resolution of the Panchayat. The word "resolution is not defined either in the Act or in the relevant rules. Nor has any such definition in the relevant statutory provisions been brought to my notice by either side. "Resolutions" in relation to a body corporate or a committee means and includes decisions taken at one of its meetings. In the backdrop of law governing meetings, the result of an election under R.5 of the Standing Committee Rules essentially finds expression as the decision of the body of the members of the Panchayat and is hence a resolution of the meeting of the members of the Committee of the Panchayat. So much so, such a resolution is one, which would be amenable to action by the Government, in accordance with law, under S.191 of the Act and hence is a resolution which can be subjected to a procedure provided by the Illegal Resolutions Rules. - Suresh v. Sta - 2006 (1) KLT 669.
S.191 – Government's power of cancellation and suspension of resolutions etc. – Impugned order passed by Government in exercise of the power under this section without notice to the panchayat and without the report referred to under sub-s.2. Hence it is not proper and in accordance with law. – Anikad Grama Panchayat v. Baiju – 2005 (2)KLT 153.
S.191 empowers the Government to cancel or vary a decision taken by the Panchayat which is not legally passed or taken in exercise of the powers conferred by the Act or any other law or its abuse, as the case may be. Hence appeal before government is maintainable. - Marykutty George v. State of Kerala.2005(2) KLT 515.