By the Court.—Petitioner, who is an elected Block Pramukh of Block Kalan, Tehsil Jalalabad, district Shahjahanpur, has approached this Court for a writ of certiorari to quash the result of meeting of Kshettra panchayat held on 24.3.2014 for considering the No Confidence Motion against her. A further relief of mandamus has been claimed to restrain the respondents from interfering with the peaceful functioning of the petitioner as Block Pramukh and not to proceed in any manner to fill up the vancancy of the Block Pramukh.

2. We have heard Shri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Udayan Nandan for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Shri Keshari Nath Tripathi assisted by Shri Shivam Yadav for respondent No. 4.

3. Petitioner was elected as Block Pramukh in 2010 and was functioning as such. A No Confidence Motion was moved against her by the members in 2012. As required under the Act, namely, U.P. Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Adhiniyam 1961), District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur issued notice to the members convening the meeting on 25.8.2012. The proceedings were challenged by the petitioner by filing Writ Petition No. 41077 of 2012 alleging that 15 days’ clear notice, as required under the provisions of the Act, was not given to the members. vide judgment order dated 14.2.2014, Division Bench of this Court allowed the writ petition. The operative portion of the said judgment reads as under.

“Consequently, we allow the writ petition and set aside all the proceedings of the meeting held on 25.8.2012 including the no confidence motion passed against the petitioner. As a consequence thereof, we also set aside the election of the respondent No. 4 in the resultant vacancy in the office of Block Pramukh, Block-Kalan, Tehsil Jalalabad, District - Shahjahanpur.”

4. A fresh No Confidence Motion dated 26.2.2014 signed by 40 members was again submitted before the District Magistrate. The District Magistrate issued notice dated 4.3.2014 to all the members fixing 24.3.2014 for consideration of the Motion. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jalalabad, district Shahjahanpur was appointed to preside over the meeting. The notice for meeting of No Confidence was again challenged by the petitioner by filing Writ Petition No. 15938 of 2014, which was dismissed vide order dated 13.3.2014. Meeting, as scheduled, was held on the date fixed and the prescribed authority declared the motion to have been passed.

5. The first argument advanced by Shri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that 11 elected members of the Kshettra panchayat, since had not subscribed to the oath of office after being elected, hence, they were ineligible to participate in the meeting and to cast their votes. It is further submitted that unless elected members subscribe to the oath of office before the Pramukh or before the Khand Vikas Adhikari in accordance with the provisions prescribed under Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats (Oath of Office of Adhyaksh or Pramukh etc.) Rules, 1994 in the form set out in the Appendix, they cannot be treated as members and their participation in the meeting of No Confidence dated 24.3.2014 was illegal and their votes are liable to be discarded. It is further contended that, in case, the votes of 11 such members are discarded, the motion of No Confidence automatically fails.

6. In reply, Shri K.N. Tripathi appearing for contesting respondent No. 4 has submitted that the Adhiniyam 1961 does not contain any specific provision with regard to ineligibility of the member, if he has not taken oath nor there is any prohibition prescribed for such a member to participate in the proceedings or meetings. He further submitted that the Rules of 1994 also only contain the manner in which the oath or affirmation is to be subscribed, and before whom. The said Rules also do not prescribe any ineligibility of