IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14657 of 2008 SMT.RAMITA DEVI, w/o Sri Upendra Narain Singh, r/o Village + P.O. Sakardi, P.S. Koilwar, District-Bhojpur ……………… Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna 3. The District Magistrate-cum-Collector, Bhjojpur at Ara 4. The Sub-divisional Officer, Sadar Ara, District-Bhojpur 5. The Block Development Officer-cum-Circle Officer, Koilwar-cum- Executive Officer, Koilwar Prakhand Panchayat Samiti, P.S. Koilwar, District-Bhojpur 6. Smt. Anju Devi 7. Sri Sunil Kumar Singh 8. Smt. Madhuri Devi 9. Smt. Mira Shankar 10. Smt. Kanti Devi (of Khesarhian) 11. Sri Jitan Ram 12. Sri Shashi Kant Tripathi 13. Sri Shabi Uzjaman 14. Smt. Usha Devi 15. Smt. Premlata Chhau 16. Smt. Meena Devi 17. Smt. Kanti Devi (of Gopalpur) 18. Smt. Lalti Devi 19. Sri Dewadhar Ram 20. Smt. Tetra Devi 21. Sri Ranjay Singh 22. Sri Manoj Kumar 23. Sri Ganga Choudhary 24. Smt. Gita Devi 25. Sri Jang Bahadur Singh 26. Smt. Munni Devi 27. Sri Manoj Thakur Names of father of Respondent nos. 5 to 27 not known to the petitioner All members of Koilwar Prakhand Panchayat Samiti, P.S. Koilwar, District-Bhojpur through the Executive Officer, Koilwar Prakhand Panchayat Samiti, Block + P.S. Koilwar, District-Bhojpur 28. State Election Commission, Bihar, Patna through the State Election Commissioner ……… Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner:- M/S Pushkar Narain Shahi, Ritesh Kumar No.1 and Sanjeet Kumar Singh For the State :- Mr. Gajendra Pd. Yadav, J.C. to AAG 6. For private Respondents: Mr. S.B.K.Mangalam, Advocate For the Election Commission:- Mr. Sanjeev Nikesh, Advocate ------------- 2 6. 01.12.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the appearing respondents. The petitioner has come to this Court for quashing of the proceedings of the special meeting of Koilwar Panchayat Samiti held on 13.9.2008 in course of which by a resolution of no confidence the petitioner has been removed from the office of Pramukh, on the ground that the same has been held pursuant to a notice dated 6.9.2008 without providing clear seven days notice in violation of the provisions of Section 46(4) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006. The admitted position is that the notice dated 6.9.2008 had fixed the date of the special meeting for considering no confidence motion against the petitioner on 13.9.2008. There was thus no clear seven days notice and the same amounts to violation of statutory provision contained in Section 46(4) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 which has been held to be mandatory by several decisions of this Court. In the aforesaid circumstances, the notice dated 6.9.2008 has to be held to be illegal and the special meeting held pursuant to the same is also non est and void in law. The notice dated 6.9.2008 is accordingly quashed and so also the decision taken in the special meeting held on 13.9.2008 removing the petitioner from the office of Pramukh. 3 It is stated that although this Court had directed on 29.9.2008 while issuing notices that no election shall be held for the post of Pramukh of Koilwar Panchayat Samiti which was fixed for 29.9.2008 at 11 A.M. yet the special meeting had been held and respondent no. 6 had been elected on the post of Pramukh in the said meeting. In view of the order of this Court no effect can be given to the result of the said meeting. In any case, since the resolution of no confidence motion against the petitioner itself has been quashed by this Court as non est and void in law, hence there was no vacancy existing on the post of Pramukh for which any election could have been held. The writ application is accordingly allowed in terms of the aforesaid directions. It is, however, made clear that it will be open to the respondent-members of the Panchayat Samiti to take fresh action against the petitioner in accordance with law. S.Pandey (Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)