Nagendra Rai, J.

1. The two petitioners, who were duly elected as Pramukh and Up-pramukh, respectively, of Minapur Panchayat Samiti, have filed the present writ application for quashing the resolution dated 4-9-2001 (Annexure 4) taken in the meeting of the Panchayat Samiti in question, whereby no confidence motion has been passed against them by 21 votes.

2. The facts necessary for disposal of the present writ application are that on 19-6-2001, an election was held, in which petitioner No. 1 Chandeshwar Prasad was elected as Pramukh and petitioner No. 2 Krishnadeo Prasad was elected as Up-pramukh of the said Panchayat Samiti. They took charge of the aforesaid posts and started functioning thereon. It is to be stated that up-till now there is no devolution of power and function to the Panchayat Samitis. respondent No. 5, namely, Suresh Rai, a member of the said Panchayat Samiti, was the candidate for the post of Pramukh and was defeated. According to the petitioners, respondent No. 5 with a view to remove the petitioners started manoeuvring everything from the very beginning. He obtained signatures of some of the members and without asking the petitioner No. 1, who is Pramukh, to convene a special meeting for considering the no confidence motion, filed a petition before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and, thereafter a so-called meeting was convened by the Executive Officer of the Panchayat Samiti by notice dated 24-8-2001 for holding a meeting to consider the no confidence motion against the Pramukh and Up-pramukh on 4-9-2001 at 11 A.M. In the said meeting, the petitioners also participated and petitioner No. 1 requested for a discussion before passing of the no confidence motion, where he could have raised question regarding the validity of the meeting and other things, but he was not allowed to do so by respondent No. 6 Maheshwar Singh, who was nominated by the members present there on 4-9-2001 to preside over the meeting of the special meeting convened for the purpose of considering the no confidence motion.

3. The petitioners have challenged the said decisions on the following grounds. The meeting was convened by the Block Development Officer, who was not notified as the Executive Officer of the Panchayat Samiti. The procedures as prescribed for holding the meetings for passing of no confidence motion under Sec. 44(3) and (4) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) have not been followed, as a result of which the issuance of notice for holding special meeting on 4-9-2001 to consider the matter of no confidence motion and the decision taken in the meeting on the said date are vitiated in law.

4. Respondents No. 5 to 25 have filed counter-affidavit and supplementary counter-affidavit. No affidavit has been filed by the State and its officers. Their stand is that the Block Development Officer is an officer of the rank of Deputy Collector and by the Government notification dated 23-12-1993 he has been declared as Executive Officer and the Government has reiterated the aforesaid decision vide notification dated 16-8-2001. Copies of the said notifications have been appended as Annexures A and B respectively, to the counter-affidavit. In view of the aforesaid notifications, respondent No. 4 the Block Development Officer, who is an officer of the rank of Deputy Collector, is the Executive Officer of the Minapur Panchayat Samiti and he is functioning as such. After election, the petitioners started behaving eratically and against the peoples interest, as a result of which 20 elected members gave a notice for calling a special meeting to consider the questin of no confidence motion against the petitioners, but the petitioners declined to call the special meeting. In support of the said fact, copies of the certificates of posting have been Annexed as Annexures D and D/A to the counter-affidavit. On 14-8-2001, 21 elected members gave notice of the aforesaid resolution to the Block Development Of