SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Pat) 132

SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
Meena Yadav Wife Of Raju Yadav, – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

Shiva Kirti Singh, J.

1. Both the writ petitions were referred to Division Bench for resolving contradictory views taken by learned Single Judges of this Court in different judgments on the issue whether Section 44 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which is somewhat similar to the same section of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 is mandatory or not so as to render the notice for a meeting to consider a motion of "No Confidence" void if it does not mention the charges/allegations for the proposed motion.

2. The essential facts are not in dispute and it is not necessary to refer to the facts in detail for deciding the issue canvassed before us in course of hearing. It will suffice, to note that the writ petitioners have challenged the notice fixing the date of meeting for considering "No Confidence" motion against them on the ground that the concerned notice did not contain any reasons/charges which are required to be mentioned in the notice under sub-section (3)(b) of Section 44 of the Act. In C.W.J.C. 12611 of 2008 the petitioners were elected Chairman and Vice-Chairman respectively of Nawadah Zila Parishad and in the other writ pet































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top