( 1. ) THIS judgment shall govern the disposal of both the aforesaid writ appeals as they arise out of common order dated 25-01-2008 passed by the Single Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 5293/07 [2008 (3) M. P. H. T. 264] whereby the learned Writ Court has allowed the writ petition filed by petitioner Shrimati satya Prakashi Parsedia (respondent No. 1 herein) and quash the order of recall.

( 2. ) BRIEF facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 writ petitioner shrimati Satya Prakashi Parsedia was elected as President of Municipal Council, dabra, District Gwalior. She was declared elected as the President in the elections held on 20-11-2004. In the Municipal Council, Dabra there are as many as 24 councilors. Out of said 24 Councilors, it is alleged that 20 Councilors moved an application for recall on 3-11-2007 under Section 47 of the Madhya Pradesh municipalities Act, 1961 (hereinafter, referred to as

act ). Said proposal was accepted by the Collector and was forwarded to the State Government. The State government referred the matter to the State Election Commission and the State election Commission on the reference made by the State Government started taking steps for elections on the proposal of recall of the writ petitioner.

( 3. ) WRIT petitioner Shrimati Satya Prakashi Parsedia filed the writ petition inter alia alleging that the procedure prescribed by sub-section (2) of section 47 of the Act was not followed, hence, the entire action of the Collector and the State Government for recall is illegal and without jurisdiction.

( 4. ) TO appreciate the argument, we have to first refer to the facts of the case. On 03-11-2007, at about 11. 45 an application for recall under Section 47 of the Act was moved which was allegedly signed by 20 Councillors. This application was addressed to the Collector who marked it to the Project Officer, district Urban Development Agency (DUDA ). Said project officer prepared a note Annexure R-1 stating that an application under Section 47 of the Act is received on 3-11-2007 at 11. 45 by the Councillors by remaining present before the Collector for recalling the President. Said President is on post since 12-1-2005, hence she completed two years ten months period. 3/4th of the Councilors have moved an application for recalling the said President. This note was put up to the project Officer. The Project Officer wrote a report on the said note that out of 24 councilors of Nagar Palika, Dabra, 20 Councilors have signed the said application after remaining present before the Collector and they have made a demand for recalling the President Shrimati Satya Prakashi Parsedia. It is mentioned by the project Officer that he has verified the signatures. He has mentioned that the said Shrimati Satya Prakashi Parsedia was elected in the year 2004 when the result of the election was published in the gazette dated 28-12-2004. The President had taken over charge on 12-1-2005. As 3/4th of the Councillors have signed the application and the President is in office for more than two years, the proposal for recall should be forwarded to the State Government. Collector has made an endorsement on the said note approved and signed the same. Thereafter, the matter was sent to the State Government for action.

( 5. ) THE contention of the learned Counsel for the writ petitioner respondent herein is that for taking action under Section 47 of the Act, recording of satisfaction by the Collector is mandatory. In such a situation, it will be necessary for this Court to refer to the said provision which reads as under :-"47. Recalling of President.- (1) Every President of a Council shall forthwith be deemed to have vacated his office if he is recalled through a secret ballot by a majority of more than half of the total number of voters of the municipal area casting the vote in accordance with the procedure as may be prescribed : provided that no such process of recall shall be initiated unless a proposal is signed by