JUDGMENT :

Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.

Since the foundational facts of these two cases are integrally connected, though reliefs claimed in these applications are different, they have been heard together with the consent of the parties and are being disposed of by the present common judgment and order.

2. We have heard Mr. S.B.K. Mangalam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, learned Advocate for the State Election Commission, Bihar, Mr. Kinkar Kumar, learned Standing Counsel No.9 assisted by Ms. Deepika Sharma, learned A.C. for the respondent State and Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned counsel for Nagar Parishad, Dhaka in both the cases.

3. To begin with, the relevant admitted facts leading to the filing of these two cases are being briefly taken note of.

4. A requisition was filed by the Ward Councilors for convening a special meeting for no-confidence motion against the Deputy Chief Councilor of Dhaka Nagar Parishad. It is the petitioners’ case that the said no-confidence motion was carried in its meeting held on 23.06.2021. The petitioners are seeking a declaration in C.W.J.C. No. 16460 of 2021 that in the light of the Rules 93 and 97 of the Bihar Municipal Election Rules, 2007 read with Section 35 of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 (in short ‘the Municipal Act’), the power to convene the meeting for election to the post of Chief Councilor and Deputy Chief Councilor of a Nagar Parishad vests in the concerned District Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate authorized by the District Magistrate in this behalf and that the State Election Commission does not have any jurisdiction to interject and that the District Magistrate is not required to refer the matter to the State Election Commission for fixing the date of election of the Chief Councilor and the Deputy Chief Councilor. The petitioners are also seeking quashing of a letter dated 19.08.2020 issued by the Secretary, State Election Commission, Bihar, whereby it had refused to fix a date for the election to the said vacant post of Deputy Chief Councilor of Dhaka, since, according to the Commission, the procedure adopted for removal of the Deputy Chief Councilor by way of no-confidence motion by a majority of the Ward Councilors was not in accordance with the law. It is the petitioners’ case in C.W.J.C. No. 16460 of 2021 that the State Election Commission has no jurisdiction to comment upon any decision relating to removal of a Chief Councilor or a Deputy Chief Councilor on the basis of no-confidence motion.

5. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, without any direction from and without any intimation to the State Election Commission, subsequently convened the meeting for election on 25.10.2021 for filling up the post of Deputy Chief Councilor, which, according to the petitioners, had fallen vacant consequent upon passing of no-confidence motion against him. In the said meeting held on 25.10.2021, the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 898 of 2022 was declared elected-unopposed as she was the only person who had filed her nomination for the said post. The State Election Commission, through its letter dated 24.12.2021 addressed to the District Election Officer (Municipality)-cum-District Magistrate, East Champaran, has intimated that the election of Deputy Chief Councilor, which was held on 25.10.2021 for election to the post of Deputy Chief Councilor was in breach of the provision under Article 243-ZA of the Constitution of India and Section 23(1) of the Municipal Act. Article 243-ZA vests in the State Election Commission the powers of superintendence, direction and control etc. for conduct of all elections to the Municipalities. The State Election Commission has accordingly cancelled the election of the Deputy Chief Councilor in the meeting held on 25.10.2021 by an order issued vide letter No. 9248 dated 24.12.2021 addressed to the District Magistrate, East Champaran. The said letter dated 24.12.2021 is under challenge in C.W.J.C. No. 898 of 2022.