1. I.A. No. 4012 of 2008 has been filed for addition of certain prayers and reliefs. It is submitted that the same has been necessitated because during the pendency of the writ application, the meeting of the Zila Parishad was convened on 10.7.2008 in which the resolution of No Confidence Motion was passed against the petitioner which is proposed to be challenged and further consequential reliefs have been prayed.

2. I.A No. 4539 of 2008 has been filed for addition of further prayers/reliefs in view of the meeting held on 31.7.2008 in which one Sri Faiyaz Alam, respondent no. 11 has been elected as Chairman of the Zila Parishad and for further consequential reliefs.

3. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that the interlocutory applications have been necessitated on account of subsequent developments, the prayer for amendments made in both the interlocutory applications are allowed.

4. I.A. Nos. 4012 of 2008 and 4539 of 2008 are accordingly disposed of.

5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 6, 8 to 17 and 19 to 21 and learned counsel for the State.

6. In the present writ application, read with the subsequent prayer added on the basis of the aforesaid interlocutory applications, the petitioner seeks quashing of the proposal for no confidence brought against her on 18.6.2008 and the subsequent removal in the special meeting convened on 10.7.2008 as the Chairman of Zila Parishad, Kishanganj and also for quashing of the subsequent election of respondent no. 11 as the Adhyaksha of the Zila Parishad in the meeting dated 21.7.2008.

7. The facts relevant to the decision of the present matter are that the petitioner alongwith the private respondents was elected as member of the Zila Parishad and thereafter on 17.6.2006, the petitioner was elected by the elected members of the Zila Parishad as the Adhyaksha. On 18.6.2008 a requisition was made by which the petitioner was requested for holding a special meeting of the Zila Parishad for passing a no confidence motion against the Adhyaksha. The petitioner did not convene a meeting pursuant to the said requisition and accordingly the District Magistrate by his memo dated 27.6.2008 fixed the date of the special meeting on 10.7.2008. On the said-date all the 17 other members except the petitioner voted in favour of the No Confidence Motion and the petitioner was accordingly removed from her office of Adhyaksha, Zila Parishad. Subsequently, on 21.7.2008 respodent no.11 has been elected on the said post.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the application has pressed only two points. It is firstly submitted that the reasons given in the requisition are vague and on the basis of the same, it was not possible for the petitioner to reply to the said allegations and accordingly the resolution passed in the meeting on the basis of such vague allegation must be held to be contrary to law and fit to be set aside. In this regard, learned counsel has referred to the various reasons/allegations contained in requisition dated 18.6.2008.

9. The second ground of challenge by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the requisition as well as the meeting in which the No Confidence Motion was passed have taken place within the first two year period of tenure of the Adhyaksha and for this reason it is in violation of the provision of Section 70(4)(ii) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 and therefore non est in the eyes of law. It is stated that the tenure of the Adhyaksha has to be counted from the date appointed for the first meeting of the Zila Parishad, that is, 10.7.2006, in terms of Section 66 of the Act since the duration of Zila Parishad itself is for a term of five years from the date appointed for its first meeting. It is argued that if any other interpretation given to the provisions of Section 70(4)(ii) of the Act then the provisions of Section 66 shall become nugatory and the term of