The words "more than half" used in S. 87A(12) of the U.P. Municipalities Act are not redundant and have been deliberately used to specify the majority required for passing a motion of no confidence.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows :-by means of the present petition petitioner Wahid Ullah Khan had challenged the resolution dated 22/12/1990, by which no confidence motion had been passed against the petitioner who was the elected President of the Municipal Board, Khatima, district Nainital. It is not disputed that the total strength of the members of the Board is 15. It is also not disputed that the petitioner was elected as President of the Board. Respondents Nos. 4 to 11 served a notice under S. 87a of the U. P. Municipalities Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, expressing their intention to move a motion of no confidence against the petitioner before the District Magistrate, Nainital. This notice was given on 19/11/1990.

( 3 ) ON 4-12-1990 the District Magistrate issued a notice to the members of the Municipal Board which was dispatched from Nainital on 6-12-1990 whereby 22nd December, 1990 was fixed for consideration of motion of no confidence. In pursuance of the notice issued by the District Magistrate a meeting of the Municipal Board was held on 22/12/1990 in which nine members participated out of whom eight members voted in favour of motion of no confidence. The sole question which has been urged on behalf of the petitioner is that the motion of no confidence cannot be taken to have been passed against the petitioner as it has not been passed by a majority of more than one-half of the total number of the members of the Board as required by S. 87-A of the Act and consequently the resolution passed against the petitioner is wholly invalid.

( 4 ) THIS petition was initially heard by Division Bench of this Court which held :-"in Mangala Prasad Jaiswal v. District Magistrate, Gorakhpur, 1970 All LJ 1122 a Full Bench of this Court has taken the view that Sub-Sec. (12) of S. 87-A requires that the quorum necessary for passing a motion of no confidence is the total number of the members and not the members of the Board for the time being. The expression total number of the members used in Sub-Sec. (12) of S. 87-A would mean total number of the members constituting the Board. In view of the decision of the Full Bench consequently, motion against the petitioner would be deemed to have been passed only when it had bee passed by a majority of more than one-half of 15 members of the Board. On a plain reading of Sub-Sec. (12) of S. 87-A of the Act half of the members cannot be seven and a half which is an impossibility and consequently has to be rounded to eight, and the resultant effect is that the majority of more than on-half could only be nine members, in a case where the Board consists of 15 members. In the circumstances on a plain reading of Sub-Sec. (12) of S. 87-A the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is well founded. "

( 5 ) THIS view is directly in conflict with the view taken by an earlier Division Bench of this Court in Ganesh Prasad Chaturvedi v. District Magistrate, Jalaun, 1956 All LJ 58, which held :-"the last submission on behalf of the appellant is that the resolution of no confidence was not passed by the Board by the requisite majority. The relevant provision is Sub-Sec. (12) which provides that -"the motion shall be deemed to have been carried only when it has been passed by a majority of more than half of the total number of members of the Board. "sri Khares argument is that where, as in the present case, the total number of the members of the Board is twentyone, half of the total number must be taken to be eleven (as half a member is an impossibility), and that as the majority must be more than half the no-confidence resolution could not be passed unless the minimum number of members voting for it was twelve. The Sub-Section is somewhat ambiguously worded, for if it was the intention of the legislature that a bare majority of the total number of the members of th