The creation of Nagar Parishad must be in accordance with the specific provisions of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 and the Constitution of India.

S.N.Hussain, J.

1. Both these writ petitions have been filed challenging Government Notification vide Memo No. 4(N)GATH-09/2008/1691 dated 20.5.2009 by which Benipur Nagar Parishad was created with immediate effect by merging 24 villages, including several Gram Panchayats e.g. Gram Panchayat Raj Basuham, Gram Panchayat Raj Benipur, Gram Panchayat Raj Bahera and Gram Panchayat Raj Mahujala all of Sub-Division Benipur in the district of Darbhanga and also for quashing all follow up actions pursuant to the aforesaid notification.

2. The first writ petition was filed by four persons, all of whom were Mukhiyas of different Gram Panchayats of Benipur Block under Darbhanga district, out of whom the names of Petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were deleted by learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the first writ petition proceeded only with Petitioner No. 1. The second writ petition has been filed by one person, who is the resident of Benipur Sub-Division. Petitioners of both the aforesaid writ petitions have claimed that neither the said Gram Panchayats have completed their five years term fixed in law nor any allegation has been levelled against them nor the consents of the said Gram Panchayats concerned have been obtained before taking the aforesaid decision. 3, In the first writ petition I.A. No. 1049 of 2010 was filed by the Petitioner for adding a further relief to the writ petition challenging Letter No. 5974 dated 17.12.2009 (Annexure-5) sent by Deputy Secretary-cum-Director, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar to the Secretary, State Election Commission, Patna communicating him the affirmative decision of the State Government to the proposed schedule of election of Benipur Nagar Parishad to be held by the Commission as well as Letter No. 3415 dated 16.12.2009 (Annexure-6) sent by the Secretary, State Election Commission, Patna to the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar giving the detailed programme for election of the newly constituted Benipur Nagar Parishad, which is under challenge in the writ petition. A prayer for an interim order of stay was also sought in the said interlocutory application. This Court vide order dated 5.2.2010 added the said relief to the writ petition, but in view of the proximity of the election the court did not stay the election and only directed that the results of the election shall not be announced and the constitution of the Nagar Parishad and the election consequently held, would be subject to the result of the writ petition.

4. learned Counsel for the State of Bihar and its authorities (Respondent Nos. 1 to 6) as well as learned Counsel for the State Election Commission and its Secretary (Respondent Nos. 7 and 8) contest the claim of the Petitioners of both the writ petitions.

5. I.A. No. 2222 of 2010 and I.A. No. 3421 of 2010 were filed by two interveners, namely S.M. Ali Imam and Surendra Kumar Jha, who had contested the election of Benipur Nagar Parishad from different wards, for being impleaded as Respondents in the first writ petition and their said applications were allowed vide order dated 15.7.2010 and they were directed to be added as Respondent Nos. 9 and 10. They contest the claim of the writ Petitioners.

6. I.A. No. 6339 of 2010 was filed by one Mahendra Paswan for being impleaded as party Respondent in the first writ petition claiming that he had contested the election of Benipur Nagar Parishad from one of its wards. Hence, this interlocutory application is allowed and he is permitted to be added as Respondent No. 11 to the first writ petition. He contests the claim of the writ Petitioners.

7. I.A. No. 6900 of 2010 was filed by three applicants, namely Shailendra Mohan Paswan, Smt. Manjula Devi and Smt. Arti Devi for being added as intervener Petitioners in the first writ petition claiming that when the said writ petition was filed they were Petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and they had also filed their duly executed vakala