Rajiv Roy, J.—Heard Mr. Sanjay Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nikesh Kumar representing the Zila Parishad, Saran, Ms. Nikita Mittal representing the respondent no. 10 as also Mr. Ravi Ranjan who represent the State Election Commission.

(A) PRAYER:

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for the following relief(s):—

“(i) for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari or any other similar writ in similar nature for quashing the notice issued under the signature of respondent no. 4 and contained under letter no. 129 dated 29.2.2024 whereby and where under notices have been issued to all elected members including the writ petitioner informing them about special meeting scheduled on 09.03.2024 at 11:00 a.m. for consideration of no confidence motion against the writ petitioner on the ground that the said notice is totally without jurisdiction as the District magistrate had no jurisdiction as also said notice does not contain any reasons/charges and thus same is in direct contravention of Section 70(4)(iv) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006;

(ii) for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari or any other similar writ in similar nature for quashing the order contained in memo no.5 dated 28- 02-2024 issued in the signature of Respondent no. 3 whereby and where under while deciding the issue of writ petitioner in light of direction issued by this Hon'ble Court the issue so raised by the writ petitioner was left out and has not been decided and straightway while holding the process to be in conformity of provisions of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006(for sake of brevity herein after to be referred as the Act, 2006) directions have been issued to Respondent no.5 (Adhyaksh) and respondent no.4 to act in accordance with law as also law laid down in case of Dharmsheela Kumari vs Hemant kumar, since reported in (2021)3 PLJR 346;

(iii) for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities to produce on record the requisition dated 05.02.2024 and production on same, same may be quashed by issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of CERTIORARI or any other writ in similar nature, for quashing the requisition dated 05-02-2024 on the ground that not only said requisition has been brought with an ulterior motive but also the reasons and charges are vague and not clear as stipulated under sub-section 4(iv) of Section 70 of the Act, 2006;

(iv) for a declaration that if statute prescribes a particular act to be done in a particular manner it should be done in that manner alone or not at all and any other mode is not only necessarily prohibited but also constitute illegality;

(v) for a declaration that if under the scheme of the act, 2006 the statute does not contemplate any power or duty assigned to any Upadhayaksh of any Zila Parishad when Adhyaksh is available then in that view of the matter, any allegation of misuse or abuse of such power or duty is nothing but an illegality and thus no validity can be attached to any such requisition which contains such allegation;

(vi) for issuance of any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for which the writ petitioner is entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

(B) FACTS/CASE OF THE PETITIONER:

3. The brief facts of the case is/are as follows:

4. The State Election Commission (henceforth for short ‘the Commission’) declared the notification for conducting general panchayat election, 2021 which included the different posts of Saran Zila Parishad. The petitioner as also the respondents filed their respective nominations from different constituencies of Saran Zila Parishad for its member’s post.

5. They were subsequently elected and on the first meeting of the Saran Zila Parishad, after the newly elected members were ascribed oath, process of election for post of Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Saran Zila Parishad took place in which, the