Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.

1. The order date 1st December, 2016 passed by learned Single Bench in C.W.J.C. No. 18258 of 2016 is subject matter of challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal whereby the writ application filed by respondent no. 12 was allowed and No Confidence Motion passed against her in the meeting held on 15.10.2016 was set aside.

2. The writ applicant was elected as Chief Councillor, Nagar Panchayat, Dhaka, in the month of May, 2012. On 19th September, 2016, 13 ward councillors, made a written requisition for convening extra-ordinary meeting of councillors to consider the requisition of No Confidence against the writ applicant. Such requisition has been appended by the writ applicant as Annexure-3, which was delivered to one Bajrangi Kumar on 19th of September, 2016 at 10.01 AM. The writ applicant has attached the subsequent communication dated 19th of September, 2016 by her addressed to the Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Dhaka, received by the same Bajrangi Kumar at 10.03 AM. The writ applicant has conveyed that she has suddenly fallen ill last night and that since she is undergoing treatment at Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, therefore, she is leaving headquarter on 19th of September, 2016.

3. Thereafter, since the Chief Councillor failed to call meeting, the requisitionists fixed meeting for 15th October 2016, which date of meeting was communicated by the Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Dhaka, vide communication dated 05.10.2016, Annexure-5 to all the councillors. The meeting was held on 15.10.2016 and No Confidence Motion was carried out against the writ applicant. It is therefore, fresh election was held on 11.11.2016 for the post of Chief Councillor in which the writ applicant has participated. The result of such election has not been declared in view of the order passed on 10.11.2016 in the writ application permitting the election to be held but it was ordered that the result shall not be declared.

4. Learned Single Bench allowed the writ application primarily on the ground that the requisition for convening the meeting for the purpose of No Confidence was not personally served on the writ applicant. Therefore, it is not a valid requisition which allows the requisitionists to convene meeting on 15.10.2016. Consequently, the No Confidence passed in the meeting held on 15.10.2016 was found to be illegal.

5. Admittedly, the requisition has been received by one Bajrangi Kumar. The stand of the writ applicant in the writ application is not that Bajrangi Kumar is not a person entitled to receive requisition on her behalf. The relevant extract from the writ application reads as under:-

"7. That it appears that thirteen ward councillors made a written requisition dated 19.09.2016 address to the petitioner wherein they requested for convening an extraordinary meeting of the councillor to consider the requisition of no confidence against the petitioner.

8. That the petitioner is suffering from severe diabetes which has related infection to her kidney, she is undergoing treatment in Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi. On 19.09.2016 condition of petitioner deterrioted and she had to proceed immediately for her treatment. She is submitted a written information to the Executive Officer stating that in connection with her treatment, she is leaving the headquarters."

6. It may be opined that the communication made by the writ applicant to Executive Officer on 19th of September, 2016 has again been received by Bajrangi Kumar. Thus, both the requisitionists as well as the writ applicant have delivered the communication to Bajrangi Kumar, therefore, both have considered him as a person authorised to receive communications. Therefore, it cannot be said that the requisition was not served on her.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents referred to Rule 2(i) of the Bihar Municipal No Confidence Motion Process Rules, 2010, to contend that the requisition has to be given to the Chief Councillor. The relevant extract reads