The main legal point established in the judgment is that a no confidence motion must be passed by a minimum of two-thirds majority of the total number of elected Councillors and must be proposed and seconded by qualified Councillors.

JUDGMENT

SUNIL B.SHUKRE,J. - Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Shri M. I. Dhatrak, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has taken a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this petition on account of non-joinder of necessary party. He submits that during the pendency of this petition, no confidence motion against the petitioner was passed and thereafter, the election for the post of Vice President, which had fallen vacant due to removal of the petitioner as Vice President of Municipal Council, Kanhan Pipri by passing of vote of no confidence, was held and another person was elected. He submits that at a time when no confidence motion against the petitioner was just passed and meeting for electing the new Vice President was about to be held, the petitioner was present and was aware of the election of another person in his place as a Vice President of Municipal Council and yet the petitioner has not joined him as party respondent.

3. Shri Firdos Mirza, learned counsel for the petitioner opposing the preliminary objection submits that there was no need for joining the newly elected Vice President as a party respondent, as by an order passed on 1/3/2021, this Court had made it clear that the petitioner shall continue to be the member of Municipal Council and can participate in the voting without prejudice to his rights and contentions and that whatever further steps would be taken by Municipal Council, Kanhan Pipri, same would be subject to the outcome of this petition. He also submits that the petitioner has questioned the legality and correctness of the Minutes of Meeting dtd. 12/2/2021, which record the passing of no confidence motion against the petitioner by majority vote of 12 Councillors including the elected President on the main ground that it does not satisfy the requirement of its passing by minimum of two third majority of the total number of Councillors and on the ancillary ground of the no confidence motion having been passed without there being any proposing and seconding as well. He submits that if the Minutes of Meeting held on 12/2/2021 are quashed and set aside everything done in consequence of the same would also go as this Court has already granted interim relief to the effect that further steps would be subject to the outcome of this petition. He thus submits that there is no need to add newly elected Vice President as party respondent.

4. The exhaustive argument submitted by Shri Firdos Mirza, learned counsel for the petitioner speaks for itself and, as it represents the factual position, it is, in our opinion, irrefutable. The obvious inference then would be that this petition is maintainable in the present form and there is no need for adding any person as party respondent with the further steps taken after passing of the no confidence motion as per the Minutes of Meeting dtd. 12/2/2021 being subject to the outcome of this petition. The preliminary objection is, therefore, rejected.

5. Now the questions that arise here are two fold. They are:-

(i) Whether no confidence motion against the petitioner, the elected Vice President of Municipal Council, Kanhan Pipri, has been passed with requisite majority ?

(ii) Whether the no confidence motion was proposed and seconded appropriately and in accordance with Rules 17 and 18 of the Maharashtra Municipalities (Conduct of Business) Rules, 1966 (For Short Rules of 1966) read with Sec. 81 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965 (For short Act of 1965) ?.

6. The provisions of law, which deal with the question of the minimum of majority required for passing of a resolution of no confidence at a special meeting, are contained in Sec. 55-1A of the Act of 1965. For the sake of convenience the Sec. is reproduced as below :

Sec. 55-1A-Removal of Vice-President by Councillors (1) A Vice-President shall cease to be the Vice-President