IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6271 of 2011 Amardeo Singh son of Late Jharkhari Singh, Resident of Mohalla- Shiaji Nagar, P.O. & P.S.- Bhabua, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3. Deputy Secretary cum Director, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. 4. The District Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua, District Kaimur at Bhabua. 5. The Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua, District Kaimur at Bhabua. 6. Returning Officer cum Director DRDA, Bhabua, District Kaimur at Bhabua. 7. Amrish Kumar, son of not known to the petitioner, Chief Councilor, Nagar Parishad Bhabua, District Kaimur at Bhabua. 8. Asha Devi wife of Sanjay Kumar Mali. 9. Bajrang Bahadur Singh, son of Barrister Singh. 10. Shajahan Begum, Wife of Sarfraj Hussain. 11. Md. Amjad Ali son of Late Ali Hussain. 12. Kamlesh Devi wife of Amardeo Singh. 13. Mira Devi wife of Birju Patel. 14. Imwasi Devi wife of Chhangur Choudhary. 15. Anwar ansari son of Ramjan ansari. 16. Baldau Singh son of not known to the petitioner. 17. Veena Shrivastava wife of not known to the petitioner. 18. Sanju Devi, Ward councilor, Ward No.3, wife of not known to the petitioner. 19. Rameshwar Singh son of not known to the petitioner. 20. Madan Singh son of not known to the petitioner. 21. Sanju Devi, Ward Councilor, Ward No.11, wife of not known to the petitioner. 22. Geeta Devi wife of not known to the petitioner. 23. Santosh Kharwar son of not known to the petitioner. 24. Vijay Tiwari son of not known to the petitioner. 25. Manju Devi wife of not known to the petitioner. 26. Dilip Paswan son of not known to the petitioner. 27. Amarnath Prasad son of not known to the petitioner. 28. Shashi Kumar son of not known to the petitioner. 29. Mungeri Paswan son of not known to the petitioner. 30. Deepa Gupta wife of not known to the petitioner. Respondent nos. 7 to 30 are the ward councilors of Bhabua Nagar Parishad through the Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua, District Kaimur at Bhabua. . . . . Respondents. ----------- 6/ 26.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and 2 respondent nos. 1 to 6. In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the resolution dated 12.02.2011 and 08.03.2011 by which no confidence motion against him has been passed and new Chief Councilor, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua was elected after holding fresh election. The petitioner also prays for declaring the special meeting dated 12.02.2011 tabled for no confidence motion against him is null and void. The case of the petitioner in short is as follows: The petitioner was elected as Ward Councilor, Bhabua Nagar Parishad for Ward no.5, for which election was held on 26.05.2007. The petitioner was elected Chief Ward Councilor in a full meeting convened on 09.06.2007. No confidence motion initiated against the petitioner failed on 24.09.2009. The petitioner submits that some of the Ward Councilors wrote application dated 24.01.2011 to Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua for grant of permission for no confidence meeting against Chief Councilor. A copy of the application has been annexed as Annexure-5 to this application. Thereafter the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua vide his letter dated 01.02.2011 communicated the concurrence of District Magistrate for holding no confidence motion meeting on 02.02.2011. The communication dated 01.02.2011 of Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua is annexed as Annexure-6 to this application. He further submits that it appears from the letter dated 01.02.2011 of Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua 3 that the date of no confidence motion has been differed to 05.02.2011. The petitioner challenged the tabling of no confidence motion scheduled for 05.02.2011 in this Court vide C.W.J.C. No. 2345 of 2011. A learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 04.02.2011 after hearing the counsel for the petitioner, the official respondents and respondent nos.6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 17 modified the date of special meeting fixed for 05.02.2011 to 12.02.2011. A copy of order dated 04.02.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2345 of 2011 is quoted herein below for ready reference: “Having heard counsel for the petitioner, Official Respondents and Respondent Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 14 and 17, the contents of Letter No.45 dated 01.02.2011 issued by the Executive Officer, Bhabua (Kaimur) is modified to the extent that the special meeting fixed thereunder shall be held on 12.02.2011 at 11:30 A.M. and with the aforesaid modification in the said notice, the writ petition is disposed of.” The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order in L.P.A. No. 359 of 2011. The L.P.A. Bench vide order dated 07.03.2011 disposed of the appeal as infructuous, as no confidence motion was already passed by then. However the learned L.P.A. Court granted liberty to the appellant to challenge the resolution passed and the order made against him on all available grounds including the grounds raised in the present Appeal before the appropriate forum. The petitioner as such has challenged the impugned resolution dated 12.02.2011 and 08.03.2011 by which 4 no confidence motion has been passed against him and a new incumbent of office has been elected. The petitioner has mainly raised two grounds before this Court. He submits that the special meeting held on 12.02.2011 and 08.03.2011 is in violation of Section 48(3) as well as 49 of the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007. The first objection of the petitioner is that the aggrieved ward councilors could not have sought permission from the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua for holding special meeting for the purposes of carrying out no confidence motion meeting against a Chief Councilor. He submits that such letter as per Section 48(3) could have been addressed to the Chief Councilor itself. He further submits that the meeting was held on 12.02.2011 in violation of Section 49 of the Act, which mandates giving of 72 hours prior notice to all the ward councilors before the date of tabling of such no confidence motion. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 6. Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 6 submits that the date 05.02.2011 was shifted to 12.02.2011 as per the order of learned Single Judge of this Court by order dated 04.02.2011 passed in C.W.J.C. No.2345 of 2011 in presence of all. He further submits that requirement of 72 hours prior registered notice would not be applicable in case of differed meeting and a convenient date is arrived at in presence of all in court. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and 5 respondent nos. 1 to 6. The main grievance of the petitioner is that neither Section 48 authorizes the ward councilors to seek permission from the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua to convene a no confidence motion. Section 48(1) states that Municipality would hold at least one meeting in a month for carrying out the purposes of the Act. Sub-Section 2 of 48 states that whenever the Chief Councilor considers the same expedient, he can convene such meeting on his own or on the application of at least 2/5 of the ward councilors. Section 48(3) of the Act states that in case the Chief Councilor fails to call a meeting then the requisite numbers of ward councilors can themselves convene a meeting. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised objection regarding application of the Ward Councilors seeking permission from the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua for holding special meeting. It would appear from the ‘heading’ of the application that the same was by way of information and not by way of seeking approval from the Executive Officer. The object for which special meeting was to be convened was stated in the aforesaid communication. It is true that the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua changed the date of schedule of meeting from 02.02.2011 to 05.02.2011. It is relevant to state here that the ward councilors were themselves competent to fix a date for holding special meeting and the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Bhabua ought not generally interfere with the dates fixed so for such meeting. The change of date by respondent no.5 will be of no consequence in view of subsequent 6 development. The petitioner challenged the holding of such special meeting in this Court vide C.W.J.C. No.2345 of 2011. It would appear from order dated 04.02.2011 that this Court after hearing the counsel for the petitioner, Official Respondents and Respondent Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 17 modified the date of special meeting to 12.02.2011. Pursuant to the aforesaid order of this Court, the special meeting was convened on 12.02.2011. Further more, Section 49 of the Act states that at least 72 hours prior notice by registered post is given to all ward councilors for holding of meeting. However, there is one exception to the provision that the mandatory 72 hours notice would not apply to a deferred meeting. The meeting earlier fixed for 05.02.2011 has been modified to 12.02.2011 by the order of this Court in presence of counsel for the petitioner, Official Respondents and Respondent Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 14 and 17. Firstly the meeting held on 12.02.2011 was a deferred meeting, thus the requirement of 72 hours prior notice as stipulated in Section 49 of the Act would not apply. Secondly the petitioner had challenged the tabling of meeting on 05.02.2011 and the date was fixed by intervention of this Court in presence of all concerned including the petitioner, Official respondents and private respondents. It would not be in this mouth of the petitioner, who was a consenting party before this Court to challenge the date 12.02.2011 fixed for tabling no confidence motion. Thus I find that there was no procedural irregularity in holding the special meeting tabled on 12.02.2011, in which a 7 resolution removing the petitioner from the post of Chief Councilor of Kamiur Nagar Parishad was passed. In the result, this application fails and the same is dismissed. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)