If a meeting is convened without notice to the persons, entitled to the same, the meeting will be invalid and the consequential proceedings taken thereat, also will be afflicted with the same kind of infirmity.

( 1 ) THIS writ appeal is preferred against the order dated 25/08/1969 passed by our learned Brother Kondaiah, J. , allowing Writ Petition No. 2201 of 1969.

( 2 ) THE writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the resolution No. 80 of the Municipal Council, Markapur, dated 25/06/1969, relating to the motion of no-confidence in the appellant herein.

( 3 ) THE sanctioned strength of the Municipal Council Markapur is twenty. The election of the Members of that Municipal Council took place in the month of September, 1967, the period of office of the council being five years. Twelve councilors of the aforesaid Municipal Council issued a written notice under sub-section (2) of Section 46 of the Andhra Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 ( referred to hereafter merely as the Act ), to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Markapur, the first respondent herein, expressing their intention to make a motion of want of confidence in the Chairman of the Municipal Council, the appellant herein.

( 4 ) IN exercise of powers conferred under sub-section (3) of the aforesaid Section 46 of the Act, the first respondent convened a meeting of the Municipal Council to be held on 25/06/1969 at 11-00 a. m. , at the office of the Municipal Council for considering the motion of the no-confidence. Notice of the meeting was given to all the elected councilors.

( 5 ) THE case of the petitioners is that at about 1-00 A. M. , on 18/06/1969, while Dodda Venkata Reddy, one of the elected councillors, and the petitioners 7, 10 and 11 in the Writ Petition, were returning from a cinema hall at Nellore where they have been to on some private work, they were attacked by a group of about fifty unruly mob under the leadership of one Atchaiah, the brother of the Municipal Chairman, the appellant herein and that Dodda Venkata Reddy was forcibly carried away while the others managed to escape and reached Markapur on 18/06/1969. Dodda Chalama Reddy, a cousin of Dodda Venkata Reddy, sent telegram to the Inspector General of Police, Home Minister and some others informing them of the attack on the four councillors and the abduction of Dodda Venkata Reddy in a grey coloured Ambassador car having A. P. Q. Number by goondas led by the brother of the Chairman with a view to prevent Dodda Venkata Reddy from attending and taking part in the meeting scheduled to take place on 25/06/1969, for the consideration of the motion of no-confidence against the appellant.

( 6 ) A complaint also was filed in the Police Station, Nellore about the incident and the Police after investigation, filed a charge-sheet in the Court in which was pending trial. It was alleged further by the petitioners that two other councillors, namely, Dodda Chalama Reddy and Penumala Balatirumumalaiah were got arrested by the Police at the instance of the appellant herein on 19/06/1969 at Markapur on some false complaint with the ulterior object of preventing them from attending the meeting of 25/06/1969. The petitioner, therefore, prayed for the issurance of a writ of mandamus in order to have the aforesaid meeting postponed.

( 7 ) WHEN the matter came up for admission before our learned brother Kuppuswamy, J. , Sri Kanyaka Prasad, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant herein, submitted that the application for postponing the meeting was filed by the writ petitioners because they were not sure about their success and that was intended only with a view to utilizing the interval to obtain a majority of votes in their favour. And the learned Judge, for admitting the writ petition made the following observations :"if ultimately the petitioners succeed in convincing this court that one of the councillors was physically prevented from attending the meeting by or at the instance of the second respondent, the meeting held would be no valid meeting at all and the petitioners would be justified in asking for quashing of the motion