Back
2017 Supreme(Cal) 218
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
HARISH TANDON, J.
Ranjana Singh & Others - Petitioners
Versus
State of West Bengal & Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 13000(W) of 2017
Decided On : 19-05-2017
Advocate Appeared:
Joydeep Kar, Mihir Kundu, Arunabha Ghosh, Anindya Lahiri, Swapan Dutta, Md. Zakir Hossain
The Court emphasized the importance of conducting meetings in conformity with the legal provisions and dismissed the petition due to lack of merit.
Headnote:
Municipality - Special Meeting - West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993, Rule 9 - Section 18(3)
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a challenge to a notice for convening a meeting for the removal of the Chairman and the resolution adopted at such meeting. The petitioners did not attend the special meeting due to fear of law and order situation. The main issue was whether the special meeting was convened in conformity with the Act and Rules and whether the petitioners were prevented from attending the meeting due to fear.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the special meeting was convened in conformity with the provisions of the Act and Rules. The fear of the petitioners was not justified as there was no legal basis to presume that the meeting would not be held due to the refusal of police assistance. The resolution for the removal of the chairman and the subsequent election of a new chairman were held to be in accordance with the law.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the special meeting and the fear of the petitioners preventing their attendance.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the special meeting was conducted in conformity with the Act and Rules, and the fear of the petitioners was not justified. The subsequent election of a new chairman was deemed necessary for the functioning of the municipality.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merit.
This is virtually a second round of litigation at the behest of some of the Councilors of the Jiaganj Ajimganj Municipality challenging the notice issued by 3 requisitionists for convening the meeting for removal of the Chairman and the resolution adopted at such meeting. Earlier the erstwhile chairman and the vice chairman of the said municipality instituted separate writ petitions being WP 11388(W) of 2017 and WP 12468(W) of 2017 assailing the notice of requisition for special meeting under Section 18(3) of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993, addressed to the erstwhile chairman on various grounds including that the signature appearing therein of 9 such Councilors are forged and fabricated.
2. A separate affidavit was filed by the aforesaid requisitionist stating that the signature appended in the notice dated 24th March, 2017are genuine and contains their signatures. A legal point was raised that when the chairman refused to convene the meeting, a separate notice of requisition is required but under Rule 9 of the West Bengal Municipality (Procedure and Conduct of Business) Rules, 1995, to be served upon the vice chairman and on his failure to convene a meeting within the stipulated time, the requisitionist may held the meeting. After examining the provision contained under the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 and the aforesaid Rules, the writ petition was dismissed as the said notice was held to be in conformity with the aforesaid provisions. Six councilors have joined in the instant writ petition and are challenging not only the notice dated 18.04.2017 issued by three of such councilors requesting the special meeting as the chairman and vice chairman have failed to convene such meeting within the stipulated time but also the resolution adopted in the special meeting convened for the purpose of removal of the chairman.
3. Admittedly, the petitioners and the respondent nos. 8 and 9 did not attend the special meeting in which the resolution was passed for removal of the erstwhile chairman, the respondent no 8. It is not in dispute that the municipality consists of 17 elected councilors out of which the respondent nos. 8 and 9 were elected as chairman and vice chairman respectively. The fact remains that the notice of the special meeting was served upon the councilors including the petitioners but they did not attend the meeting. It is stated in the writ petition that the respondent no. 1 was attacked by some miscreants and was apprehensive to attend the meeting held on 24.04.2017. The apprehension was real in the sense that the executive office of the municipality before the said special meeting, wrote to the officer-in-charge of the Jiaganj Police Station to provide adequate police assistance for maintenance of law and order situation. The office-in-charge of the said police station responded to the said request and showed his inability to provide such police force because of the ensuing election of Domkal Municipality and requested the executive office of the municipality to defer the date of meeting. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Lalbag, Murshidabad also indicated the aforesaid fact to the executive office of the municipality and requested him to do the needful.
4. The petitioner therefore states since the executive office was apprehending that there would not be a peaceful meeting and it is very difficult to maintain the law and order thereat, such apprehension is fortified by the aforesaid action of the authorities. Basically the writ petition is founded on the facts that the petitioners being apprehensive of law and order situation that may arise during the special meeting did not attend the same and there is no fair and transparent meeting held on 24.04.2017. Since the meeting ended with the resolution of removal of the chairman by the councilors present and voted a further meeting was called to elect the chairman during the pendency of the instant writ petition and such facts have been disclosed in the affidavit-i
