Hon’ble Ajay Bhanot, J.—The petitioner was elected Pramukh of Kshetra Panchayat Jalesar, Tehsil Jalesar, Etah, in the year 2015. The Kshetra Panchayat is a local body constituted and governed by the U.P. Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Panchayat Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The Act in turn has been promulgated and the local body has been constituted in adherence to the mandate of Part IX of the Constitution of India.

2. Some members of Kshetra Panchayat, District-Etah, resolved amongst themselves to table a motion of no confidence against the petitioner. The said intent to move a vote of no confidence was reduced to writing, in the shape of a written notice of intention dated 1.1.2018. The said written notice of intent to make the motion of no confidence dated 1.1.2018 was caused to be delivered to the Collector, Etah to requisition the meeting to consider the motion. The Collector upon receipt of the written notice of intent convened a meeting to consider the motion of no confidence on 22.1.2018. In this regard, the Collector issued a notice dated 4.1.2018 to the members of the Kshetra Panchayat, intimating the date, time and place of the meeting.

3. The petitioner has laid a challenge to the said written notice of intent to make the motion of no confidence dated 1.1.2018 and the notice of the Collector dated 4.1.2018 convening the meeting to consider the vote of no confidence, in the instant writ petition.

4. Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri I.S. Tomar, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Shri M.C. Singh appearing for the respondent No. 6.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Arvind Kumar Singh opened his challenge to the orders impugned in the writ petition, by initially raising two submissions. Firstly it was contended that out of 75 elected members of the Kshetra Panchayat Jalesar, District Etah, only 59 members had taken the oath of office prescribed by law. The remaining 16 members of the Kshetra Panchayat Jalesar, District Etah had not taken any oath or affirmation of office as prescribed by law. Consequently, the said 16 members of the Kshetra Panchayat Jalesar were not entitled to requisition the meeting of no confidence and nor can they lawfully vote in the proposed motion of no confidence.

6. The second submission of learned counsel for the petitioner was that the written notice of intention to make the motion dated 1.1.2018, was signed by only one member namely, respondent No. 6. A valid written notice to make the motion, requires the signatures of at least half of the total elected members of the Kshetra Panchayat. The notice is illegal being violative of Section 15(2) of the Act. The Collector Etah could not have convened a meeting of Kshetra Panchayat to consider the vote of no confidence on the foot of the said written notice of intent. Hence, the notice dated 4.1.2018 issued by the Collector convening the meeting is illegal.

7. In opposition, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 contended that the petitioner has not brought material documents on the record of the writ petition. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 drew our attention to the endorsement in the written notice of intention dated 1.1.2018 that the affidavits of 46 members in support of the proposal for no confidence are attached to the notice. The said affidavits of the 46 members in support of the motion of no confidence are not a part of the writ petition. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 thereafter produced the said affidavits.

8. Undoubtedly, the failure on part of the petitioner to bring the said affidavits sworn by the 46 members, in the record of the writ petition warranted a dismissal of the writ petition. It is the duty of every petitioner/litigant to come with clean hands making a fair, complete and truthful disclosure of all facts and documents, before he can invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court.

9. Confronted with