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

2021 Supreme(Pat) 1153

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ANIL KUMAR SINHA, J.
Saneha Kumari, Wife of Rajiv Ranjan Paswan and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar Through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna and Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12295 of 2021 with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 11164 of 2021
Decided On : 13-08-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar Manglam.
For the Respondents: Mr. Abbas Haider, Mr. Amit Srivastava, Mr. Girish Pandey, Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh.

The main legal point established is that the convening of special meetings for No Confidence Motion must adhere to the statutory provisions, including the requirement of clear notice and timing, as prescribed by the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 and the Bihar Municipal No Confidence Motion Process Rules, 2010.

Headnote:

No Confidence Motion - Violation of Statutory Provisions - Bihar Municipal Act, 2007, Section 25(4); Bihar Municipal No Confidence Motion Process Rules, 2010 - Rule 2(i), Rule 2(iv)

Fact of the Case:

The case involves a challenge to the No Confidence Motion and removal of the Deputy Chief Councilor of Kochas Nagar Panchayat. The petitioner argued that the special meeting for the No Confidence Motion was called in violation of statutory provisions.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the notice convening the special meeting was not in accordance with the statutory provisions, and therefore, the impugned decision taken in the special meeting was quashed. The respondents were given liberty to convene a fresh special meeting in accordance with the law.

Issues: Violation of statutory provisions in convening the special meeting for the No Confidence Motion.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the notice convening the special meeting was unsustainable in law due to the lack of clear 72 hours notice as required by the statutory provisions.

Final Decision: The impugned decision taken in the special meeting was quashed, and the respondents were given liberty to convene a fresh special meeting in accordance with the law.

ORDER :

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.

2. Since common question of law and fact is involved in these two writ applications, both writ applications are being taken up together with the consent of the parties.

3. The petitioners of CWJC No. 12295 of 2021 has prayed for directing the respondent no. 5-the District Magistrate, Rohtas, to call the meeting of the elected Councilors of the kochas Nagar Panchayat for the purposes of election to the post of the Deputy Chief Councilor for Kochas Nagar Panchayat, which has fallen vacant because of removal of respondent no. 7-Ruby Devi (petitioner in CWJC No. 11164 of 2021). The petitioners of CWJC No. 12295 of 2021 have been impleaded as respondents in CWJC No. 11164 of 2021.

4. The petitioner of CWJC No. 11164 of 2021 has challenged the No Confidence Motion, dated 03.05.2021, carried out by the Kochas Nagar Panchayat against the petitioner, by which she has been removed from the post of Deputy Chief Councilor of the Kochas Nagar Panchayat, on the basis of the No Confidence Motion passed against her. The petitioner has also sought for a direction against the respondents restraining them from holding fresh election for the post of Deputy Chief Councilor, Kochas Nagar Panchayat.

5. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner Ruby Devi was elected as Deputy Chief Councilor, Kochas Nagar Panchayat, on 22.04.2019. On 27.04.2021, the twelve private respondents of CWJC No. 11164 of 2021 sent a requisition to respondent no. 7, the Chief Councilor of Kochas Nagar Panchayat, requesting her to convene a special meeting for No Confidence Motion against the petitioner, Ruby Devi. Thereafter, the respondent no. 7 issued a letter, vide Memo No. 480, dated 28.04.2021, directing respondent no. 3-the Executive officer, Nagar Panchayat, Kochas, to convene a special meeting on 03.05.2021, at 12 noon, for No Confidence Motion against the petitioner. Accordingly, in the special meeting held on 03.05.2021, the No Confidence Motion against the petitioner, Ruby Devi, was passed by majority of votes and she was removed from the post of Deputy Chief Councilor.

6. Mr. Ansul, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ruby Devi, submits that the special meeting for consideration of No Confidence Motion against the petitioner was called in violation of the statutory provisions of law and referring to Rule 2 (i) of the Bihar Municipal No Confidence Motion Process Rules, 2010 (herein after referred to as ‘2010 Rules’), submits that Rule 2 (i) of the 2010 Rules specifically provides as follows:

    “2. No Confidence Motion brought under Section 25 (4) of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 against the Chief Councillor/Deputy Chief Councillor shall be considered and disposed of as per the following process:-

(i) To remove the Chief Councillor/the Deputy Chief Councillor, a special meeting of the elected Councillors shall be called for. Such special meeting shall be requisitioned and signed by not less than one third of the total numbers of the elected Councillors which shall be given to the Chief Councillor. Notice shall be issued by the Chief Councillor for the special meeting of the Urban Local Body within seven days from receipt of requisition and the meeting shall be convened within fifteen days of the date of issuance of the notice.”

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ruby Devi, next submits that the notice has been issued, for convening the special meeting for consideration of No Confidence Motion, by the Executive Officer and not by the Chief Councilor of the Kochas Nagar Panchayat. He further submits that as per Rule 2 (iv) of the 2010 Rules, the notice for considering No Confidence Motion against the Chief Councilor/Deputy Chief Councilor shall clearly contain the reasons/allegations on which the No Confidence Motion is to be brought, but the notice, dated 28.04.2021, did not contain any reasons/ allegations against the petitioner, Ruby Devi. He further, referring to Section 49 of the Bihar Municipa

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 Back to top