( 1 ) THESE two writ petitions raise a common question of law touching the validity of the notice prescribed under the provisions of section 47 of the Karnataka Zilla Parishads, taluk Panchayat Samithis, Mandal panchayats and Nyaya Panchayats Act. 1983 (hereinafter called. 'the Act')

( 2 ) IN W. P. No. 16660 of 1988 the petitioner is an elected member and pradhan of the Mandal Panchayat in question. The notice of meeting for moving a vote of no confidence against him was served on 13-10-1988 i. e. , on the date of the meeting and this matter was not on the agenda. of the meeting held on 19 -9-1988. In the circumstances it is contended by the learned counsel Sri Rayareddy that that the notice is bad in law being violative of mandatory requirement of the IInd Part of sec. 47 (3) of the Act.

( 3 ) IN W. P. No. 12221 of 1988 the petitioner is an elected Pradhana of the mandal Panchayat in question and his grievance is that the notice of meeting for moving a vote of no confidence against him was despatched on 20-7 1988, was received by him on 2 8 1988 and the meeting was convened on 10-8-1988 and thus the notice of meeting falls short of the period of 1 5 days prescribed in t