Mr. Satish Kumar Mittal, J.: - This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by Mela Singh, President of Municipal Council, Longowal, Tehsil and District Sangrur, challenging the interim order dated 30.5.2012 (Annexure A-1), passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 6015 of 2012 filed by the appellant, whereby the stay granted in his favour vide order dated 2.4.2012 (Annexure A-3) passed in the said writ petition, has been vacated.

2. After notice, we have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The brief facts of the case are that Municipal Council, Longowal, consists of 14 members (13 elected Municipal Councilors and one ex officio member, i.e. Member of the Legislative Assembly of the Municipal area). The election of Municipal Council, Longowal, was held in the year 2008. The appellant was elected as Municipal Councilor from Ward No.6. Thereafter, on 23.7.2008, in the first meeting of the Municipal Councilors, he was elected as President of the Municipal Council.

4. In the month of March, 2012, 10 members of the Municipal Council, i.e. 9 Municipal Councilors and one ex officio member, moved a requisition requesting to convene meeting of the Municipal Council for considering ‘no confidence motion’ against the President. On the said requisition, vide letter dated 26.3.2012 (Annexure P-1), meeting of the Municipal Council was convened on 28.3.2012 at 11.30 AM. However, vide letter dated 27.3.2012 (Annexure P-2), i.e. one day prior to the convening of the meeting, Deputy Commissioner, Sangrur (respondent No.3 herein), requested the Executive Officer, Longowal, to intimate all the members of the Municipal Council that since different organisations had given a call for Punjab Bandh on 28.3.2012, it would be difficult to depute observer, therefore, in order to avoid any untoward incident, the said meeting be post-poned after 2.4.2012. On 27.3.2012 itself, intimation regarding postponing of the meeting by the Deputy Commissioner was duly conveyed by the Executive Officer to all the members of the Municipal Council, including the appellant. In spite of having the knowledge regarding postponing of the meeting, the appellant convened the meeting on 28.3.2012 at 11.30 AM, which was attended by only four Municipal Councilors, including the appellant. The meeting was convened without any intimation to the other Municipal Councilors and without any Observer being appointed by the Deputy Commissioner and even without getting the proceeding book from the Executive Officer. In the said meeting, a resolution (Annexure P-3) was passed showing confidence in the President and none of the members, present in the meeting, supported the ‘no confidence motion’ against the President.

5. Thereafter, on 29.3.2012, the appellant, by filing Civil Writ Petition No. 6015 of 2012, challenged the postponing of the meeting dated 28.3.2012 by the Deputy Commissioner vide his letter dated 27.3.2012 (Annexure P-2). Vide order dated 2.4.2012 (Annexure A-3), passed in the said writ petition, notice of motion was issued and convening of the meeting to consider the ‘no confidence motion’ was stayed till further orders.

6. In the meanwhile, the Regional Deputy Director, Local Bodies Government, Patiala (respondent No.1 herein), vide order dated 12.4.2012 (Annexure P-5) suspended the aforesaid resolution (Annexure P-3) passed in the meeting convened on 28.3.2012, on the ground that firstly the meeting was contrary to the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner postponing the meeting, and secondly, the said meeting was attended by only four members, therefore, the quorum for the said meeting was not complete. In view of this fact, the appellant amended the writ petition and also challenged the aforesaid order dated 12.4.2012, passed by respondent No.1.

7. Separate written statements were filed by respondents No. 3; 4; 6 to 14; and respondent No.15.

8. The learned Single Judge, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, vide interim order