Surinder Singh, J.

1. The controversy, in substance, orbits around the interpretation of the words ``call a meeting as appearing in section 25(3) of the Punjab Municipal Act (Punjab Act 3 of 1911, hereinafter referred to as the Act). The other points are mere fragments of the meteor.

2. The factual aura is not clouded. The petitioner Raghubar Dass is the elected President of the Municipal Committee, Nabha, and has been a Member of the said Committee for the last about twenty years. On December 16, 1981, seven Members of the Municipal Committee sent a requisition to the petitioner, in his capacity as President, for holding a meeting of the Committee. On December 30, 1981 (within fourteen days of the receipt of the requisition) the petitioner called a meeting of the Committee for January 14, 1982 to consider the requisition which was, in fact, a No-Confidence Motion against him. It transpires that the Executive Officer of the Committee in spite of having received communication of the above meeting, instead convened the meeting of the Committee on January 4, 1982. The allegation is that this was done by the requisitionists in connivance with the Executive Officer. It is also a