The case revolves around Smt. Amrapali Sakharam Kamble, who was the Sarpanch of a Gram Panchayat and faced a No-Confidence Motion due to her absence from multiple meetings. The petitioner challenged the motion, arguing that her rights were violated. The court, however, upheld the No-Confidence Motion, stating that the procedure followed was legally sound and aligned with democratic principles. The ruling emphasizes the importance of adhering to legal protocols in governance and underscores the principle that the will of the majority prevails.

1. Introduction

• Background of the petitioner, Smt. Amrapali Sakharam Kamble.
• The No-Confidence Motion filed against her.

2. Petitioner's Argument

• The petitioner’s claim of rights violation.
• Her absence from Gram Panchayat meetings and submission of views through written communication.

3. Legal Analysis

• Examination of the procedural requirements for a No-Confidence Motion.
• Legal principles related to governance and democratic processes.

4. Court's Judgment

• The court's analysis of the petitioner's absence.
• Affirmation of the legality of the No-Confidence Motion.
• Emphasis on the rule of law and majority will in local governance.

5. Conclusion

• The court's decision to uphold the No-Confidence Motion.
• The broader implications for governance and the enforcement of legal protocols in democratic institutions.