JUDGMENT:

Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.

1. The instant writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the show cause notice dated 26^th November, 2025 and the order dated 19^th December, 2025 whereby the Governor has been pleased to declare that the Board of Councillors of the Jangipur Municipality is incompetent to exercise statutory functions imposed on it by powers conferred under Sub-Section (2) of Section 431 of the West Bengal Municipal Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) and has consequentially dissolved the Board of Councillors. The petitioner also seeks to challenge the subsequent order dated 19^th December, 2025 issued by the Governor in exercise of powers under Section 431(3) of the said Act whereby the Governor has been pleased to appoint the sub Divisional Officer, Jangipur as Administrator with immediate effect for a period not exceeding 6 months or until a newly elected Board of Councillors takes over charge, whichever is earlier.

2. The petitioner claims to be an elected councillor of ward No. 3 of Jangipur Municipality who had been elected pursuant to the elections held in the year 2022.

3. According to the petitioner all on a sudden a show-cause was issued on 26th November, 2025, by invoking the powers under Section 431(1) of the said Act. Though a response was filed dealing with the points noted in the show-cause, the order dated 19^th December, 2025 was passed thereby dissolving the Board of Councillors, and an administrator was also appointed to take charge of the affairs of the municipality.

4. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned senior advocate appearing in support of the petition has drawn the attention of this Court to the provisions of Section 430 and 431 of the said Act and would submit that the aforesaid exercise of powers by the State is not in accordance with the provisions of the said Act and the Rules framed thereunder.

5. By placing before this Court, Section 430 of the said Act, he has submitted that the State can exercise certain powers, in the event, the State is of the view that the Board of Councillors had made default in performance of duties and in such event, it is the duty of the State to offer opportunity to the Board to remedy the breach by fixing a period for due performance of such duty by the Board. In the instant case, no such opportunity was provided.

6. By drawing the attention of this Court to the show-cause notice dated 26th November, 2025, it is submitted that the Government issued the show-cause notice based on a mass petition dated 20^th November, 2025. According to Mr. Bhattacharya, though it was incumbent upon the State Government to disclose the mass petition dated 20th November, 2025 based on which the above show-cause notice was issued, the said document was not disclosed in the show-cause. This apart by placing before this Court the provisions of Section 431(1) of the said Act, it is submitted that the State Government did not, in the instant case, form an opinion for initiating proceeding under Section 431(1) of the said Act, and in absence of formation of such opinion, no proceedings under Section 431(1) of the said Act could have been initiated.

7. It is submitted that though, the Board had responded to the above show-cause by a notice in writing dated 1^st December, 2025, the response given by the Board was not adhered to, and without considering the same the order impugned dated 19^th December, 2025 was passed.

8. By placing the above order, it is submitted that though an enquiry report received from the District Magistrate, Murshidabad dated 16^th December, 2025 was considered by the State while passing the order impugned, such enquiry report was not disclosed to the petitioner. The aforesaid would constitute violation of the principles of natural justice, apart from the statutory violations as indicated hereinabove.

9. It is submitted that the order dated 19th December, 2025 dissolving the Board cannot be sustained. The subsequent order dated 19^th December, 2025 appoin